Ya Bezzer!

Their recent home record isn't that bad. Wins against St. Johnstone & Dundee, draws against Rangers & Hearts and loses to Hibs & Kilmarnock. Given our record at Firhill in modern times I think we shouldn't be putting our house on a win. Another midweek match I can't go to. Seems like ages ago since I was at a league match (Oct 28th to be precise).

Posted on P&B yesterday but I was looking at this and we've not scored a goal in the last 5 league matches Moult hasn't played. In the 10 league games over the last two seasons, Moult hasn't started, ie came on as a sub, or didn't feature at all, we've scored 6 goals when he's not been on the pitch. Not great then.

Said it over at P&B but it's worth repeating. Willie Collum is a referee that consistently goes out on to the pitch in order to hijack the match and make it all about him. He absolutely revels in controversy, deliberately provokes it and see's himself as a headline act with the actual game incidental. He should have been thrown out of Scottish football years ago. Sadly though, Collum, isn't even the worst referee in Scotland. Take Andrew Dallas, a referee not fit for schools football, and yet propelled into the top rank at the age of 32 despite being utterly incompetent. What a coincidence then that his dad is Hugh Dallas, former head of referee development. Our referee's are, in the main, an arrogant clique of narcissistic peacocks.

We don't often seem to agree about much but I'm with you on this. Clubs putting out statements after games is pure cringe and one of the worst introductions to the modern game.

Has to be Carson. Took command of his box, caught most if not all of the crosses and made a few saves as well.

Celtic had 70% possession. If that's not chasing the game what is?

Despite the penalty the result was never really in doubt. Three finals where we've basically chased the game for 90 minutes. Disappointing to say the least.

I think we make about 1 pass in 5. Need to be so much better in possession than we have been. Celtic have been a bit sloppy in the final third but that will change when Griffiths comes on so we need to push further up the pitch and keep more ball. So far you get the impression just want to get rid of the ball as soon as they get it. Need to find a wee bit composure.

I was actually talking with someone about what sort of result would be best for us. After a drubbing like that are Celtic down and vulnerable or more motivated to do the same thing to us and maintain their domestic superiority. Don't think there is any easy formula to it.

A home tie against local rivals, who'd turn their nose up at that? Lot of water to go under the bridge before the tie is played so current form doesn't mean much. Should be favourites to go through though and if we do surely we are due a wee team.

Great result going into the Final. Must be a huge confidence boost.

That man Moult!

Radio claiming its a back 4.....

Worried about the spine of that team.

Just got round to watching the Rep Ireland v Denmark match. Would have been about 1-10 if it wasn't for Randolph. Some of the Irish defending was absolutely atrocious.

The second time we've played both Aberdeen and Hibernian this season I've felt like they have adapted their set up to tactically nullify us - and its worked. We've lost both and failed to score in both. I wasn't at Ross County so can't comment too much on that match but the result was there to see and a trend is starting to develop. I think we need to show a bit more stylistic and tactical invention when we start coming round for the second or third time. I've said before that we should play a four at the back against Celtic, tomorrow would be a good time to trial run it.

Probably worth re-iterating that no formation or team selection guarantees anything and if Celtic hit form and we don't you are probably looking at 0-3 and upwards. However we have to create game conditions that favour us and I don't think a passing game with the players we have is in our interest. We can't compete technically with Celtic but we can physically. So why on earth would you play a technical game? As I said earlier Robinson has us set up that way and that's the way we will play - the big question is really 4 at the back or 3, not what our style of play will be.

Can we play on the carpet against Celtic? I'd love to see McHugh and Dunne's pass completion stats but I bet they are pretty poor. I'm afraid this is a long ball team whether you like it or not. Celtic's weakest area is central defence. If Bowman can cause them problems, hold the ball up and we get players forward to support him, I don't see that being any less effective than us imagining we are technically good, which we aren't, and trying to thread a pass. This team is all about balls over the top and getting crosses pumped in. If we have a game plan to get into forward areas of the pitch and we press high up the pitch it can work. It's also the most pragmatic way of keeping the ball away from danger areas. It won't work if we are sat deep on the 18 yard line and we are simply thumping the ball into empty areas for Celtic to pick up and take possession but it's down to the players and manager to make sure that doesn't happen.

For me the problem with 4-2-3-1 is how do you make Moult, who is probably our greatest asset, effective when he's struggled playing on his own? My answer is to play him in a deeper position and have Bowman up top. Is it ideal? No. But I think it's the best compromise between having a goal threat and being open at the back. If it doesn't work but we are at least defensively competent you can change your game plan at 0-0 or 0-1.

4-5-1 is only parking the bus if you set it up to play it that way. Tactics and formation are not the same thing. Hibs line up against Celtic in the 2-2 draw was this. ----------------------Marciano----------------------------- Whittaker ---Hanlon----Ambrose------Stevenson--- ---------------Bartley----McGinn------------------------- --Slivka---------McGeouch-----------Boyle------------ --------------------Stokes--------------------------------- Hardly parking the bus. You have five bodies in midfield with three primarily attackers. I agree that we can't sit in and hope to survive but what we can't do is allow Celtic space in the wide areas. For me four at the back is the only way to do that. Also if you want to keep Celtic's full backs, who are both dangerous coming forward, in check then you are much better being able to double up down the wide areas with a wide midfielder and a full back. Also gives our wide players cover when they are attacking and perhaps they do that more because they aren't thinking "there's nothing behind me". The amount of space Candeias and Windass got at Hampden last time was ridiculous. We just can't allow that to happen again if we are serious about winning a trophy.

Wilson Humphries should definitely be on the list. Won Scottish and League cup with Motherwell, played for the club for 10 years, capped by Scotland and is one of our top post war goalscorers.

You know what would be suicide - thinking we can play the same system against Celtic that we did against Rangers at Hampden. We got away with it once, we won't a second time. In that formation every time the ball goes left Dunne balloons it up the park and McHugh gives the ball away every time the ball comes out of defence. Absolutely no out ball. We spend 80% of the match in our own half. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Every time Celtic have dropped points against domestic opposition this season it was against a team playing 4-5-1.

--------------Carson------- Tait--McHugh--Hartley---Hammell ----Bigirimana---Campbell--------- Moult--------Cadden------Tanner --------------Bowman----------------- How I would play it. Bowman has to be the battering ram with others making diagonal runs into the spaces. I'd play Cadden centrally and Moult wide. We need to compete in the middle of the park and I think Cadden's physical stature and pace will be more useful there. I also think Cadden gets into goal scoring areas better when playing in the centre. Moult plays wide quite a lot of the time anyway so I don't see it as being that alien to him. He'll make the runs to get into the box. Celtic are weaker on the right side of defence (probably Lustig - Bitton) so if we can get quality balls in from our left side I think its more than possible that someone like Moult can make runs between the centre halves. He's decent in the air and if you ask me Craig Gordon often flaps at crosses. For me it's our best chance of scoring outside of set pieces. Defensively Kipre is all over the place at the moment so I'd put McHugh back there. For me the opposition knock the ball past McHugh to easily when he plays in midfield and against a team of Celtic's calibre that's more or less a death sentence so dropping McHugh into a deeper postion where he isn't going to get caught out to the same degree solves two problems. There are weaknesses, especially down our right side but there are going to be weaknesses whatever formation we put out and this formation is the best compromise between defensive and attacking football. If we have no goal threat there's not much point turning up.

Decent shout but McHugh has to go from midfield before the Celtic match. Opponents with any forward momentum bypass him so easily it's frightening. Would give me major fear against a team of Celtic's calibre. Perhaps he might well be better in a deeper position. In terms of the cup final I think if we have any chance we have to go four at the back because again Celtic will absolutely crucify us in those wide areas. Rangers should have done but didn't have either the quality or finishing to punish us but we were exposed repeatedly and looked very vulnerable. Celtic won't let us off the hook in those positions so its a no brainer. Would be using Aberdeen away as a 'practice' match with 4 at the back. Worth noting that although 3 at the back has made a bit of a revival in Scottish football this season the three times Celtic dropped points it was against teams playing forms of 4-5-1.

Frear apart not changes I would have made. Why would you drop your best midfielder this season but keep Rose and McHugh in? Every one knows Moult needs someone to play off so why drop a centre forward for someone who's not? Tanner did well last week but he's not a direct replacement for Bowman. For me Campbell and Bowman have been 'enablers' that allow the team to play effectively in the style we do. Will be interesting to see how they do today.