Jump to content

capt_oats

Legends
  • Posts

    1,634
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    35

Everything posted by capt_oats

  1. Brill was on the bench at the weekend in the 1-1 draw with Blackpool so it's not like he's gone straight into the side.
  2. Agree re: Samson in terms of actually re-signing him when he was out of contract but I think with regards Brill any comment on him signing really needs to be caveated with the point that we signed a 'keeper with SPL experience, who had only played 20 mins of first team football in 18 months. I've no idea if this was the case or not but with the benefit of hindsight I get the feeling that we took a punt on Brill given the fact he had been out as long in the hope that with some work and rehab we'd end up with the goalkeeper who did well for ICT and had the potential to be a better option that Samson, allowing us two experienced goalkeepers on potentially less that we might otherwise have expected (with Samson having been offered reduced terms and Brill presumably open to offers as he'd been released and had a well documented injury situation). The reality with Brill was that we just ended up with a goalie who seemed out of shape and in truth wasn't even near Samson's level. Not that that makes the upshot of the signing any better but I think there's a point at which we should probably acknowledge that in signing Brill we weren't necessarily getting the same 'keeper that had been first choice at ICT.
  3. Yeah, Charlie Richmond seems to have been piping up quite a bit about Motherwell of late. It's apparently "irrelevant" if the player gets the ball. This ran today: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/motherwell-can-no-complaints-carl-9764431 This went out a while back: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-fights-happen-motherwell-because-9393822
  4. What's curious (to me at least) is that there's nowhere near the same consensus between players. Gary Harkins was discussing it in a Twitter thread with Michael Stewart and Steven Thompson last night: https://twitter.com/garyharkins1985/status/828308039119810560 It seems to me like you separate groups here; - those in the media & fans who are removed from the context of actually being on the pitch pointing at the rules and running with "by the letter of the law" angle - players who seem to have a much more practical view of it and go with the gut feeling and instinctive reality of going for a 50:50, 60:40 challenge ie: "he's gone for (and won) the ball, Cowie wasn't injured, never a foul". On the point of the appeal, it's worth noting that a "reckless" challenge is still only a yellow, it's when "excessive force" comes into play that you're looking at a red. For me the notion of "excessive force" is very much subjective and I'd have said that there's an argument there that at worst it'd have been a yellow. If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick. • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off Serious foul play A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. http://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/FootballDevelopment/Refereeing/02/79/92/44/Laws.of.the.Game.2016.2017_Neutral.pdf As an aside, and I realise this drifts off into the realms of 'whataboutery' but it's notable that of late we've heard referees piping up about how when making these decisions you should disregard the ball. It was interesting to me the notion of when referees should & shouldn't take intent to play the ball into account, for example, denying a goal-scoring opportunity; Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned unless: • The offence is holding, pulling or pushing or • The offending player does not attempt to play the ball or there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball or • The offence is one which is punishable by a red card wherever it occurs on the field of play (e.g. serious foul play, violent conduct etc.) In all the above circumstances the player is sent off. So in one instance it's permissible to consider the ball and intent but not in a tackle in the field of play.
  5. Depends what you're classing first team squad players? Are you including the likes of Thomas and Moore (who are out on loan), MacLean and Ferguson who are u20s players on the fringes of the first team or McFadden who's registered as a player but primarily has a staff role. Looking at it on the basis of those who have regular matchday involvement or were obviously signed for the first team I count 21 "first team" (which seems a reasonable number compared to those clubs around us) supplemented by 5 from the u20s group. Goalkeepers: Samson, Griffiths (on loan from Everton) Defenders: Tait, Heneghan, McManus, Hammell, Chalmers, Kennedy, Jules (on loan from Reading) Midfielders: Cadden, Ainsworth, Clay, Lasley, Lucas, McHugh, Pearson, Frear Attackers: McDonald, Moult, Bowman, Blyth U20s: Ferguson, MacLean (injured), McMillan, Hastie, Campbell Out on loan: Thomas (on loan at QotS), Moore (on loan at Ayr United), Mackin (on development loan at Alloa Athletic) Player/Asst. Manager: McFadden
  6. Ha! Happy to help. In fairness, he signed the other day and hasn't played a game since December so it wouldn't be a massive shock if he wasn't involved but I don't think the signing zone things are really that much of an indication either way.
  7. Apart from Chalmers doing one before the Sevco game, Clay doing a signing before the Killie game and Heneghan & Tait both doing theirs before the Thistle game, you mean?
  8. I'd be inclined to agree though the form of Moult & McDonald means that neither are going to be dropped to give Bowman or Blyth a game and it's difficult to honestly judge based on the limited opportunities Bowman and Blyth have had. What is probably most telling I guess is that we were apparently willing to go ahead with the Ciftci deal even after the McDonald thing broke down. You can even look back to McGhee's comment after the County 4-1 game that it was up to Bowman and Blyth to improve their levels to match Moult and McDonald if they wanted to get into the side. In fact McGhee commented in the Motherwell Times earlier in the week that he hoped the Ciftci approach focussed Bowman so there's still the suggestion that both need to improve. I watched Blyth is the u20s game he played against Thistle at Firhill and he did quite well. Held the ball up, missed a sitter of a header early on but there was absolutely nothing that suggested he'd get into the side ahead of Moult or McDonald. Equally, other than the game against Accies where he was quite involved (header for Moult's opener, won the pen) Bowman's not really shown much either. Ultimately I suppose it's not a huge leap to say that Ciftci is a better player than Bowman and Blyth, so assuming the budget was there then bringing him in may have strengthened us (if he ever actually got fit given he's played a total of 31 minutes this season for the first team and that was back last July in two sub appearances in the Lincoln Red Imps games). Who knows though, if there's still some budget to play with and we genuinely feel we're short up front beyond Moult and McDonald could there be an option to bring in someone who's out of contract and could make a difference? I was genuinely quite surprised to see that he was someone we were looking at albeit on loan given that our usual market has been the lower leagues in England however if it was as potential replacement for McDonald then I suppose it made a bit more sense. Again, given he's barely kicked a ball for Celtic I suppose the thought would be that Celtic are just desperate to move him on one way or another so the fact that they reportedly paid £1.5m for him becomes less reflective of his present value and equally the fact that he's perceived as being a relatively big name (given the fee and the club he's at) possibly gives a false reflection of the sort of budget we'd have available or be willing to pay and the options that may be available.
  9. You've included Lasley twice there. Take your point but it's probably fair to say there's an acknowledgement that we're viewing McMillan and Chalmers as full backs, MacLean's injured for the forseeable and Lasley will probably be being used more sparingly. So for 4 midfield spots we've got 10 players, 2 for each position and a couple as cover. Sounds about right tbh.
  10. +1 on the delighted to have Pearson back bus. Genuinely amazed to read people questioning it tbqh. Of those midfielders who regularly start Cadden has 1 goal in the league this season, Clay 1, Lasley 0, McHugh 0, Lucas 0. Pearson finished last season with 9 goals. The idea that anyone looks at our team this season and thinks we haven't missed Pearson is absolutely wild. It's been clear the team has lacked balance, we've been shoving right sided players (Ainsworth, Clay, Cadden, MacLean, McMillan) out on the left of midfield in the hope they could do a job and get by. That imbalance had been compounded by McHugh's injury. In Pearson, Frear and Jules we've gone out and recruited naturally left sided players. We've brought in Frear but going by his cameo against Rangers he could take a while to adjust to the step up. With Pearson we know exactly what we're getting. A player who was the club's 3rd top scorer last season, can add a bit of dig in the midfield as well as a bit of presence. He can also carry the ball box to box, granted perhaps not as effectively as he used to but so far this season our only real out ball has been Cadden, with any luck Pearson coming back in will give us another option in that respect. As I said, delighted to have him back.
  11. Assuming Pearson's fit then in McDonald's absence I wouldn't be against giving Ainsworth a shot up front playing off Moult. Samson Tait Heneghan McManus Hammell Cadden Lucas McHugh Pearson Ainsworth Moult I agree that it seems a waste to just have him sat on the bench given what he can contribute but at the same time Cadden's clearly nailed on for the wide right position, which is fair enough because he's a smashing player. However if we're missing McDonald as someone to link midfield and attack Ainsworth can at least pick the ball up and run at folk.
  12. Alan Burrows already confirmed that was the case on Wednesday morning after the window shut and I'm pretty sure the club's in question are mentioned earlier in this thread. Port Vale and CSKA Sofia? Confirmation that 2 offsets for Moult were rejected here: https://twitter.com/alan_burrows/status/826603203009581060
  13. Not to be all McGhee-apologist but I really do wonder what sort of a difference it'd have made to the first half of the season if McHugh had been available. One of the criticisms this season seems to have been that McGhee doesn't know his best side, I think there's a fair chance that he does but hasn't had a chance to play it regularly. Obviously it's his squad and up to him to pick from what's available but looking at the team he picked last night then adding Pearson to that in place of Lasley along with a match fit McHugh and Lucas then there's an argument that had that team been available then there's every chance we could have been in better shape just now.
  14. I think the confusion is possibly that UEFA rules allow it. See Paddy Roberts playing for Celtic against Man City in the group stages.
  15. Not being wide but how do you know it's taken a while to offer him something. IIRC we were supposed to be sitting down with him in the first week of the window. He's a free agent, it seems perfectly reasonable for him to explore other opportunities if he wants. If we did indeed offer something early on then he knows that's there as a fall back and he can look at other destinations in his tour round far flung continents getting properly paid. I know McGhee said in his press conference last week that it wasn't a deal that was on our radar but again what McGhee says in press conferences and what's actually going on are 2 different things.
  16. For what it's worth, Western Sydney Wanders have signed a striker since McDonald did that interview. 35 year old striker Ryan Griffiths signed until the end of the season. Confirmed earlier this morning. https://twitter.com/wswanderersfc/status/826200033762512896
  17. Enjoyed that this evening. Thought the Accies boy who got the 2nd red absolutely sold the jerseys. The way it was going at 3-1 with 20 to go there's a reasonable chance they'd have seen it out however once they went down to 9 it was shootie in. Ridiculous challenge on Fry and a nailed on red card. Cracking goal from Hastie to win it though.
  18. Even Baraclough had benched Laing in his final days after his roasting in the East Fife game. IIRC he only started 1 game between then and McGhee taking over and playing him as a DM vs Celtic.
  19. He's started following the club on Twitter so it's clearly a done deal.
  20. That's how I interpreted it as well. That at the start of the window he'd been looking at 3 or 4 positions however of the two that were supposed to be coming in yesterday only 1 of those was one of those targets that he'd anticipated strengthening. I took the additional guy to be the goalkeeper too.
  21. I'm loathe to trust Transfermarkt 100% but from his profile on there it looks like his deal is up in the summer. Is there a chance we might be looking at him in a slightly longer term sense since you'd think Laing and Kennedy will be patched if not in this window then definitely summer and what with the *business model* and all that we could be looking to sell Heneghan on in the next window? http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/zak-jules/profil/spieler/309041
  22. I'd have thought it unlikely he'll go straight in to the team but having watched Brill with the u20s I can completely understand McGhee not playing him ahead of Samson, he genuinely didn't look any better. I think, unfortunately, that the injury he had has taken its toll. He looked slow and lumbering with next to no agility which isn't surprising given he's only had 20 mins of competitive football in 2 years. If Griffiths comes in and shows that he's better than Samson then I'd be surprised if he didn't get a shot.
  23. The Sean Murdoch thing is a bit weird given he was put up for the pre-match press call by Dunfermline yesterday. Would be an odd thing to do if they knew he was moving. https://twitter.com/officialdafc/status/824671749698678784
×
×
  • Create New...