Jump to content

 

 

[FT] Partick Thistle 0 - 2 Rangers (Windass 39; Tavernier 59)


Recommended Posts

Yeah, a bit better after half-time and we strolled to victory really as Thistle fell out the game.

 

It's a good three points but as much as there were some good passages of play, generally the performance was unimpressive and we're still no way near clinical enough when we dominate possession.

 

We move onto Somerset Park on Sunday and that's likely to be another similar game with a stuffy team who'll work hard and be physical.  We better make sure to turn up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought we moved the ball forward quicker and more accurate tonight, than Saturday. We looked comfortable, You can see the signs the team is jelling slowly, Once Cumming is up to speed and if he is to partner Morelos, it will pay dividends, I thought Windass was good as was Murphy he really does look a good yin, Goss, Tav, Bates all played well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the workrate and enthusiasm shown by Cummings tonight, I wonder what it will take to remove Windass from the shadow striker role and see us play with Cummings and Morelos up front? Yes, Windass has goals and assists to his name, but otherwise he was about as effective as Pena on a good day. I'm not looking for a whipping boy, but given we have two strikers essentially "on fire", chaps who harrass people and create stuff for others or themselves, it really leaves me wondering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Barebear said:

Hugh Burns really likes "big Bates". Another good performance but I wouldn't have handed him man of the Match. I'm becoming a big fan of Candias. What a supplier he is. Id love to see his assist record. 

 

5 goals, 7 assists. But his build up play sure accounts for much more goals and assists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gonzo79 said:

I only saw the opening 20 minutes but we looked poor.  Bad passes and a general lack of conviction.

 

Docherty should be starting from now on.

I put that down to Partick being "up for it". We started to get much more on the ball after that. Holt lifted us a bit around that point by chasing down and winning the ball a few times. I wasn't too worried at that point, although there were a few hearts in mouths when Sammon hit the post. Not sure how we'd have reacted to that if it went in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people have been talking about aggression on this and other threads where some thought it was a requirement and others did not.  I tend to think it is a requirement and it brings to mind a story I read about the young David Beckham before he had broken into the team.

 

Roy Kean was watching him in a reserve game alongside SAF who says to Kean what do you think of him? Kean replies that he thought he had all the qualities to be a top player with one reservation, he isn't aggressive enough.  That was taken on board and they set work on making Beckham more aggressive however that is accomplished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.