dennyc

Of the two I think Robinson would be more likely to consider Hibs given the Dempster connection. He would be crazy to go to Hearts where Director of Football Levein would oversee every move he made and ensure Robinson carry the can for poor returns or transfer failings. He likes a scapegoat does Craig. Remember how he destroyed Cathro and called his signings not good enough for a team like Hearts, only for it later to come out that Levein had brought many of those signings in against Cathro’s wishes. Robinson needs autonomy and a strong and trusting relationship with his bosses. I’m not sure he would get that under Budge and Levein. But if Levein was to be sacked entirely after a derby defeat this weekend.............. and Budge acts to placate the fans...... Other than salary and transfer budget it would be a huge risk to go to to either of those clubs given their current problems. Hardly security for life. Better to hold off for a decent English Championship or Division One side where his long term future might a bit more secure and rewarding. He’ll stay with us for now.

From a thread on the Rotherham fan forum. Early days but it appears Hastie has been well accepted. He was also praised by Gerard for his application, attitude and willingness to learn.....even if it meant a loan placement.. Certainly all positive so far and it seems he is forging ahead. Time will tell but it certainly does not look like a career wasted because of his decision to join Rangers. Jake Hastie

Yeah, but he'll never make it! The silence on here from the bitter crew is deafening. Ryan Bowman scored again as well.

I don't believe for a second there is a "lightweight in midfield" issue. More problematic is a lack of numbers in midfield at times as a result of playing three out and out forwards. Compounded by the tiring effect on those three midfielders of having to run themselves into the ground covering four and sometimes five opponents. Look at how Celtic pushing an extra man into midfield (Ajer) changed that game. Until then our "lightweight" midfield more than held their own against the best team in the country. If the full backs step up to support then that leaves too much space at the back for decent forwards to exploit. It's the down side of playing a more attacking, two winger focused style. But to even contemplate dropping our most...perhaps only...creative midfielder is just crazy. If we need to strengthen midfield for specific matches (away from home?) it can be done by playing an extra player in that area at the expense of one of those three forwards. 4-4-2 perhaps with Seedorf dropping out. I can certainly see four in midfield coming into play when Turnbull is fit.

Shhhhh! You'll upset folk on here.

The Law was changed to exactly this. If a penalty is not given (as often happens), then it is the referee ignoring the law change or bottling it. Change introduced specifically to address jersey tugging which often ends with the player falling inside the box after having tried to stay on his feet when he was first dragged back. It was seen as penalising the attacking player to bring the play back to the place of the initial contact.

On the plus side, they also did not highlight the Long tackle in the first half that could easily have been a red card.

Not defending him without admitting he has a lot to learn. But on one occasion second half Robinson screamed at him to cover back when we were under pressure, which he immediately did try to do. Literally seconds later Donnelly was screaming at him to get up the field having covered the area the Manager was pointing out. Once again with our wide players it's trying to get the best of both worlds in attack and defence. Its a tough and confusing ask for someone so inexperienced. More seasoned players than Seedorf have struggled to play that dual role....Ainsworth and Frear as examples. Remember Omar Daley?. Hopefully Seedorf is a quick learner. Ability and attitude wise I think there is something there. The goal he scored yesterday shows that. And to say he did nothing else is just not true. You conveniently ignore the chance he set up for Scott. He contributed more for us than the likes of Horgan did for Hibs....and many regard him as a good player. I get Seedorf is a frustrating player and he probably would not be my first choice. And maybe he won't make it. But Hylton and Ilic can also be just as frustrating . Scott did really well yesterday, but try telling me he made the correct choices every time he had the ball. Awareness of teammates and realising when to pass will come in time, but those are things Scott needs to develop. Compared to those three Seedorf is miles behind in game experience at a decent level. It's a huge step up. Confidence also plays a huge part, and again those three are in a better place. Players that we sign are unlikely to be the finished article. Some will have more to learn than others. Some will not make it and eventually leave. But please let's not crucify a young lad who is doing his best and is on a huge learning curve. Particularly after he scores in a match we actually won by a street FFS. But then, we need scapegoats if Dunne is not playing.

If the Authorities had their way you would have their colts in the lower leagues AND their first teams in the Premier League. Not that long ago Rangers even guaranteed to buy at least 500 tickets for every away league game their colts played in an attempt to bribe the wee clubs to vote for their inclusion. That happens, the OF can hoover up even more youngsters and play them in meaningful, competitive games.

I’m told Hastie had the choice of Rotherham, Zurich or us. He chose England. Don’t really blame him. He would have had a huge target on his back at Motherwell. I wish him well.

Polworth supported by Campbell and Donnelly controlled the game . Ensured we played a passing game. With better end product from Seedorf and latterly Hylton we would have scored a fair few more. Long led the line brilliantly, scored a great goal and worked his socks off. Two goals in two games . My man of the match. Seemed to work well with Scott wider Dunne far from the worst defender and actually played at least too really good balls into the box. Less long balls than his central defenders. The odd Dunne ism which he mostly tidied up himself. Wound up Dallas so bonus points for that. Poorest Accies team I have seen for years. No threat whatsoever. The Polworth, Dunne and Long haters on this site must be choking on their tea tonight.

Thanks for the link. Quite revealing. So under " Was not seen" every incident in the past 18 months deemed worthy of suspension has been SPL and mostly involving offences against Celtic. Either the lower league referees are eagle eyed/shit hot or the official observer is not doing any referrals. Kind of brings us back to the trial by television angle being supported by hard facts. Now that the Championship is featured each week on the new BBC channel can we look forward to more citings from those games? Time will tell. I do think Caroll merited a red card, but so do many other incidents involving players of every team. The difference? Michael Stewart and Steven Thompson bumping their gums on Sportscene....and the teams involved.

The whole thing is a lottery. Sportscene certainly plays a part by selecting which incidents to highlight and make an issue of. But incidents they highlight are not always picked up by the Compliance Officer. From memory a Rangers player being kicked in the head by a Kilmarnock player and a Celtic player (Simunovic?) getting off with a forearm to the face of a Hibs player. Observers also have a role to play, but how impartial are they if it is one of their mates officiating ( or in the case of Andrew Dallas ,the son of a mate)? I would also question whether an observer would be more likely to question an inexperienced referee's judgement rather than that of a more senior official. The old boy network if you like determining the harshness of any official report. But out of curiosity.... and I genuinely can't recall any..... can anybody give examples of lower league players being cited for incidents that happened in non televised games. Particularly where a referee issued a yellow card. if there are none or very few in comparison to Premier League referrrals then that would suggest that either there are no violent tackles in those matches or that TV coverage plays a major role in any decisions to refer.

Well, that will do wonders for team spirit! Something that has served us well in recent years. Sure, some of the new signings are not playing well and appear short of fitness. So do several of the established players. But, hey, let’s only blame the new boys and single them out in public. If Steve Robinson has an issue with players, old or new, he should be addressing it behind closed doors. Voicing criticism publically (no matter how valid) seldom ends well. Wonder how he would react if players or his Board criticised his questionable tactics or team selection in such a manner?

I agree the wingers have been poor. All of them. But for Robinson tonight and on Saturday to blame the defeats on new unfit players is just nonsense. Many of the established players have also been terrible, but they seem exempt from criticism. In fact, in my humble opinion, our two most consistently well performing players are newbies.....Gallagher and ( despite some views on here) Polworth.

Or maybe the wingers hold onto the ball too long because the full backs don’t help them by making runs beyond them. Or there is nobody in midfield demanding the ball. Or their is nobody in the box to cross to. Tait’s first season he was near the top of the table for assists, having made runs forward and provided a decent final pass. That was on the right side of the pitch to be fair. Wingers are not great. Far from it. But it’s not all down to them. Also it’s hard to control a pass when it’s three feet over your head and endangering the crowd in the East Stand.

He was one of the main reasons we lost as was also the case on Saturday . I do agree though regarding playing him on the left. But then we have a Manager who opts to disrupt the entire team when the first choice left back is out, rather than give a chance to a natural left sided reserve at full back. Different if Tait had actually performed to any sort of decent level throughout pre season or in any competitive game so far. But he hasn’t. Not even in his proper position. His poor form from the last few months of last season has continued. For whatever reason, he is not the same player as he was 18 months ago. Injury? Confidence? Livingstone might not be the answer , but we will never know unless he is given a proper chance, even if it is only through injury or suspension. He performed better than either of tonight’s full backs in what limited playing time he was given in pre season. Certainly provided more going forward than Tait and actually went beyond Hylton....something Tait now seems reluctant to do. What was the point in giving Livingstone a new contract if the Manager does not trust him or believe he is up to it? As for those long diagonal passes. It’s soul destroying. How many have we seen fired over the winger’s head and out of play ? But it’s not only Dunne. Every defender and midfielder tries the same thing. Maybe we should be asking questions of the person that is instructing them to play that way. It’s not unplanned. Maybe somebody should point out that you can actually pass the ball on the ground to the wide players.

That stuff shows clearly how the Panel operates and comes together....as well as highlighting that the panel can more or less come to whatever decision they like irrespective of evidence or even lack of evidence.......without having to give an explanation. But unless I missed it (which is entirely possible) it does not clarify exactly how possible offences can be brought to the Compliance Officer's attention. It must only come either from TV Highlights or a referee supervisors report. My bet is Trial by Television. Or can I or any other fan ask them to look at the next assault by Brown or Christie? I guess not. The whole thing is random and inconsistent. I can just see the BBC editor opting out of showing certain incidents in case it hurts his own team. whoever that is. And it's a great point about lower league matches with no TV coverage. I would imagine most folk would settle for the referee's decision being final, but that opens up a debate about erroneous red Cards being overturned. Can't have it both ways I suppose.

Most folk are not saying it was the artificial pitch that made us play badly. It was the tactics we persisted with for most of the game that were the problem. To play on that particular surface the way it was prepared for Saturday you had to forget about trying to play free flowing football through midfield. The quote from The Herald was spot on. We should have learned our lesson from last season's league match there. in the circumstances a draw was not a poor result but if we had adapted better I think we could have won.

I think Raith Rovers also went down the artificial route this season and can be added to the list

Reading some of the comments on here you would think we had been bullied all day long. Livingston were just not that physical...that's a myth based on history and the players they had last season, many of which have moved on. In fact, there is a strong case for saying that Gallagher was the most physical player on show, closely followed by Lithgow of Livingston. Also Carroll was responsible for the only violent tackle in the whole match. So, no, Livingston were not overly physical. They were just smarter. Aberdeen and Hearts will be much more of a physical challenge. What Livingston did do was play a style suited to that dreadful pitch. Rarely running with the ball, clearing their lines with no farting around in defence and getting the ball into our box as quickly as possible, often by way of set pieces, throw ins and goalkeeper clearances. Horrible to watch but depressingly effective. Any attractive football they did try to play only happened around our penalty area. On the other hand, we stuck to our usual attractive game plan....passing ,probing and driving forward with the ball... which was ineffective on that surface, with our wingers struggling to make an impact. We did not need to be more physical, we just needed to adapt our style to counter the conditions. There is no need to bring in more physical players, the existing ones just need to be a little more aware of what works and what doesn't on a game to game basis.

That Livingston team were nowhere near as physical as they were last year. Think back to the league defeat (2-0?) early last season. Only Lithgow at the back and Dykes playing up front were up to that standard. Not so surprising really with Halkett, Gallagher and Menga moving on. Players such as Dunne and the same Gallagher dealt fine with the physical challenge in defence but I accept Scott did find it tough going up front against Lithgow. But players such as McMillan and Devine are certainly no more physical than the likes of Campbell and Tait. And to say our lack of physicality was the reason for not winning is way off the mark. Particularly in midfield. I put that down to players repeatedly making the crazy decision to try and run with the ball on a pitch that made that tactic virtually impossible. Illic, Campbell, Donnelly, Hylton and others won the ball in midfield then found it stuck between their feet as they tried to move forward, enabling lightweight players like Lawless and Souda to touch the ball away. Or fall down and claim a free kick. And although Barclay was strong on the ball, I would not rate him as overly physical, or Sibbald when he came on. Even though Seedorf did better the same problem happened once or twice. Same with Cole and Long. Running with the ball just did not work. After the first 10 minutes, most chances we created either came from long passes, set pieces. And getting in early crosses. Gallagher could/should have scored at least twice late on when we actually put the ball into the box. in short (in my opinion) we got our tactics wrong. And refused to change them. Much as it makes the eyes bleed, Livingston got their approach spot on given that surface. Lump the ball forward at every opportunity bypassing midfield wherever possible. Take no risks in defence. No passing the ball back and forward across the back line. Play the game in the opponents box. The exact opposite of the style we are set up to play. Even their throw ins followed that rule in the hope of winning the second ball. Passing back to their goalkeeper from half way so he to could plant the ball on our penalty spot. We have better football players than Livingston and our Manager clearly thought that superior ability would win the day. In the end, we have Gillespie to thank for escaping with a point. I’m not advocating Hoofball, far from it. I detest it. Watching it at Fir Park was soul destroying. But on that Livingston pitch is their really any other option for a team with our quality of players? Let’s keep the silky skills for surfaces that allow our talented players to strut their stuff. Vary our approach taking into account all circumstances....or at least change something mid match that isn’t working. Meantime a point away to Livingston is not a disaster or a reason for dismantling the side.

Spot on. It's the way the system can work and if a team can operate it to their advantage then good luck to them. Celtic purchased a player with potential for future resale at a profit who was not quite ready for their first team but could continue to progress elsewhere. Very forward thinking. St Mirren gained as outlined. Win Win. All of us would have been turning cartwheels (or trying to) if Norwich or anybody else had signed Turnbull for £3m and then loaned him back to us for the season. That would have been viewed as great business. A coup no less. So well done St Mirren. Clubs are entitled to expoit the rules if it benefits them. Motherwell certainly do so

Have you heard if he has been registered? Taken to Gibraltar and played in most pre season games so far. But not on Bench even with Candelas left at home. Not registered so cannot play?

Anybody know if we have agreed a fee with a Rangers re Hastie? I see he is listed in their Europa squad and in Gibraltar, but not playing or on bench. Registration in course maybe? Either after agreement or Tribunal bound. The cash might be helpful this window.