12 games in 37 days will define the season

[onevision 1,568]

7 hours ago, Bill said:

Of course he is.

At best, a windbag.

At worst ..... 

ASD....Attention seeking disorder.

[CammyF 8,079]

11 hours ago, SykseyBear said:

No. Because i do. My belief in myself and the players i choose. That and the fact not a single St Mirren player would even get into our reserve team never mind the fully rotated starting 11 i want to see. Their manager is a clueless clown. And their form. My 11 would blow them away. 

 

Maybe. No. No. 

 

If we win tmrw we still won't win the league. People need to wake up here. What is wrong with you? We aren't winning the league. We will drop more points than them and we will also bend over for them at New Year. This squad, this manager, his team, is not winning the league. End of story. 

 

Will they? No they won't. We know they won't. I don't think otherwise, i know it's must win but that's not really the point here. A win merely papers over the cracks. A win changes nothing. It merely prolongs the agony. Feeds your false hope. I'm moaning now, before we even kick a ball knowing that we will win. Win, lose or draw PC is going to do something i don't like tmrw and i will most likely mention it at some point. You can read it as a moan, i'll state it as a eyes wide open bigger picture assertion of the current situation.   

 

As far as i am concerned the damage is already done by PC. We all know how it ends. He's nowhere near the man our fans think he is. 

 

There will be no fall out. We've got fans still rating Lammers ffs. Clement has our idiots in a trance. There will be no fallout. 

There will be no fall out? Jeez......

[Blue Moon 1,289]

I fear if we play with 10 men again today we will be lucky to scrape a draw.   I was willing to give Lammers a lot of time but he really is as bad as they come.  Utterly clueless.  The manager is in danger of staking his reputation on him.

[Rousseau 10,603]

Lammers is not a #10. I don't understand why he's continually played there. 

 

He's a forward, and - if we're to get anything out of him - must be played there. 

 

Although, he's behind Danilo and a fit Roofe, for me. 

[CammyF 8,079]

1 minute ago, Rousseau said:

Lammers is not a #10. I don't understand why he's continually played there. 

 

He's a forward, and - if we're to get anything out of him - must be played there. 

 

Although, he's behind Danilo and a fit Roofe, for me. 

That and playing Cantwell out wide are bafling decisions. 

 

Said for a while, Danilo looks like he needs support up top. Sima, Matando, Roofe or even Dessers or Lammers could partner him. However the real issue is not having natural wide players other than McCausland and Wright.

 

 

[Gonzo79 15,292]

13 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

He's a forward, and - if we're to get anything out of him - must be played there. 

We've seen him in action in the box and it doesn't look like we'll get anything out of him there either.

 

He's a man down and has to be dropped, for the good of the team and probably for his own good too.

[Rousseau 10,603]

7 minutes ago, CammyF said:

That and playing Cantwell out wide are bafling decisions. 

 

Said for a while, Danilo looks like he needs support up top. Sima, Matando, Roofe or even Dessers or Lammers could partner him. However the real issue is not having natural wide players other than McCausland and Wright.

 

 

Cantwell wide right is forced, as PC said in his press conference. He's a #10, or wide left cutting in; the latter was his usual position at Norwich. 

 

Matondo is a RW, but again has been injured. 

 

We've got very few wide options because we've not played with wide players too often. It's a choice. It's not wrong, per se - although it is an issue now when we want to play with wide players. 

[RANGERRAB 3,654]

24 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Lammers is not a #10. I don't understand why he's continually played there. 

 

He's a forward, and - if we're to get anything out of him - must be played there. 

 

Although, he's behind Danilo and a fit Roofe, for me. 

Perhaps I’m in a minority when I say I think there is a player in there regards Lammers but time is running out fast for him to prove himself.

Hes not a number 10 as you say and won’t get a look in at that position if Tom Lawrence is back fit

[RANGERRAB 3,654]

12 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Cantwell wide right is forced, as PC said in his press conference. He's a #10, or wide left cutting in; the latter was his usual position at Norwich. 

 

Matondo is a RW, but again has been injured. 

 

We've got very few wide options because we've not played with wide players too often. It's a choice. It's not wrong, per se - although it is an issue now when we want to play with wide players. 

I’d suggest young MacAusland might solve our wide right problem although maybe too early to say.

[Rousseau 10,603]

10 minutes ago, RANGERRAB said:

I’d suggest young MacAusland might solve our wide right problem although maybe too early to say.

He's a good option, but as PC said, he can't play 90 minutes every three days; he's not ready.