Kmcalpin

Good to see things moving at last although the timing isn't perfect. Hopefully there will be a decent response.

Its a difficult issue. If the whole of the East Stand was transformed into a safe standing area there would be hordes of irate ST holders threatening to boycott the club. We would have to designate part of a stand, unless the Police rule otherwise, and that would have to be where those standing caused least disruption to seated fans. Although its tricky I'm confident the club could come up with a solution to keep everyone happy. Agree about prices. The OF will back this proposal on 2 conditions: 1 No reduced prices 2 They can cram more into Ibrox & Parkhead.

Pretty certain that our club will pursue this if NLC and Police give the go ahead. A trial area could be created at the South Stand end of the East Stand - to avoid obscuring the view of seated fans in that Stand. Converting the POD Stand enclosure is a definite NO NO. The Police would not tolerate that on safety grounds (emergency exit from the POD Stand).

Stump up £2,000 and appeal the ban. The whole incident was totally mishandled by the referee who in hindsight influenced the entire game and possibly the outcome.

Will prices for standing and seating areas be identical? Are fans happy to pay the same for a standing area as a seated area? Will clubs lose revenue if seated areas are priced cheaper. Will ground capacities increase? Many questions at this stage. Interesting though.

I quite agree that we've no right to win any game but I sincerely hope SM is trying to fathom out ways of improving our home form, I'm sure he is. However our home form has been mediocre, not poor, for months now and there is little indication of any change in tactics or line up (ok I accept Daley for Humphrey) is a limited change. We are displaying the same weaknesses that we did months ago and if we can see that, then sure as hell opposition managers can. If any team aspires to finish 3rd, and I don't expect to incidentally, then they must have good home form. I could accept yesterday's result if it was a one off or if SM had been constantly trying out different options such as a 4-4-2 formation or a 5-3-2 formation or bringing in Tim Clancy, Bob McHugh or Steven Lawless but he hasn't. Our failings yesterday have been apparent all season: * Michael Higdon playing with no support * A slow predictable and over elaborate build up through central midfield * Failure to get the ball out quickly enough to whoever is playing on the wings and only doing so when they are marked by 2/3/4 men. * Jamie Murphy playing out of position and looking like a fish out of water * Defending too deeply * Giving the opposition acres, sorry hectares, of space when they're attacking despite ours being a tight pitch * Failure to turn pressure into efforts at goal Now this might sound like a gripe but its not. Our away form has been quite exceptional and my comments should be taken against that background. I'm sure fans of every team could produce similar lists. We are sitting 3rd and I don't see any reason why we shouldn't try to remain there. To do so however will require us to work on our weaknesses. St Mirren too have every right to feel aggrieved at yesterday's result and I see no reason why their fans shouldn't discuss their weakensses and ways to improve. My rant does however carry the normal health warning. There will be the usual factors about which I, and other fans have no knowledge - the manager's view of certain players, their off the field attitude/behaviour, injuries, tactical nuances. I'm not saying that 3rd spot is impossible but we will have to work on our long standing weaknesses to improve the probability of achieving that.

We produced some great football and some appalling football in the same game. The referee was hugely influential unfortunately. Our usual failings at home meant we had to settle for a point, which after all is said and done, is not good enough. Saints were far more direct and aggressive. Whilst we exerted a reasonable amount of pressure it was Saints who pulled the trigger much more often. Stuart McCall really needs to sort out our line up and tactics in home games.

The game will go ahead. A change of tactics is required though to a more defensive gameplan to try to draw Saints out and create some space. The build up to this match is important too as we saw how over confidence, in some quarters, affected St Johnstone last week.

Does anyone know if was a penalty in the first half? It was impossible to tell from the away end if it was a deliberate dive, a great tackle or cast iron penalty. Radio pundits seem to suggest it was a penalty.

A good result which was richly deserved. A very important 3 points that consolidates our league position. The wide pitch and Saints' attacking approach gave us the space we needed to deploy our counterattacking game to the full. Not great goals but they all count. I was a bit surspised by Saints - a big physical side who used their height and weight advantage but lacked in skill. Still did Stuart McCall not warn us about that very thing? A good all round team perfomance against an aggressive physical side. Its telling that Darren Randolph hardly had a save to make. Murphy and Daley caught the eye but Jennings and Lasley dug in well in a very difficult situation, and not one they'd want to face too often. Nicky Law had a wonderful match too and caught out his opponents time and again with a crafty performance. The centre backs dug in well after a rather shaky opening 5 minutes and coped very well with the towering Marcus Haber. They knew early on that they couldn't and wouldn't compete with him in the air and switched tactics. The most pleasing feature for me was our game plan. There were areas of the game in which we could never have competed directly with Saints and both sides knew it. But, we didn't try to and instead used craft and guile to pick out and exploit their weaknesses, fatal ones as it turned out, to great effect. Good to hear Yir Elder at last getting the recognition he deserves and fans of Simon & Garfunkel would also have appreciated the singing from our end.

Not at all, its an extremely good point. Its not the main reason of course, but it will be a factor. As we have a narrow pitch it makes it just that little bit easier to close our wingers & wide midfielders down. If we are trying to mount an attack it gives us that bit less room. Hibs were able to despatch 4 defenders very quickly to close Nick Law down at the corner flag and then withdraw them just as quickly once the danger had dissipated. They could not have done that on a wider pitch. A point well made Wellfan 2K7

Thats my take too Jim. We have got fast players like Murphy, Humphrey and Daley who love nothing more than to run at defenders. However they all have to have space. Thats why we are picking up points on the road, as we can hit teams fast on the counterattack. However home games need a different approach when teams come to Fir park and sit in. On Friday night Chris Humphrey was frequently marked by 2 and sometimes 3 defenders. On the other side I saw Nicky Law closed down by 4 defenders on 2 separate occasions near the corner flag. They were petrified that he was going to cross the ball. Part of the problem was that Stephen Hughes and particularly Steve Jennings (who had a great game defensively incidentally) mounted slow predictable attacks out of defence when what we needed was to run at and turn retreating Hibs players. Inevitably by the time the ball was released to Humphrey he was marked by 2 defenders. By comparison Hibs could move up the park with 2/3 passes turning our defenders in the process. Without doubt our mediocre home form has been influenced by team selection issues, tactics and the make up of the squad itself. That said we are sitting 3rd in the table, so Stuart McCall is getting something right.

Am I right in thinking that SM thought that Keith Lasley would be out of action for a fortnight?

Firstly the club & Police handled the fire/floodlights problem well. But we can count ourself fortunate to earn another bite at the cherry. In hindsight the re-arranged line up was wrong and we missed Keith Lasley badly. A better option would have been to bring in Tim Clancy at right back and move Tom Hately into the midfield. Other than that it was a predictable and poor home performance with all our old weaknesses evident. Hibs were generously afforded the freedom of the left wing but did not return the compliment and they closed us down all over the park. The midfield was largely anonymous and I didn't realise Stephen Hughes was playing until he trooped off at half time. Our attacks were far too slow and predictable. Michael Higdon was again isolated and Chris Humphrey received appalling service which he did nothing with anyway. Again Jamie Murphy was all over the place frequently turning up 30 metres behind the play. Really we've discussed all the same failings ad nauseum all season. Lest I forget, Leigh Griffiths behaved like a half cut yob on the Friday night bevvy and was very very fortunate not be shown a red card. Thankfully his meagre yellow will stand.

The proof of the pudding and all that. IF Hibs sit back and Stephen Hughes plays, that may provide some answers to our long standing questions. Whilst more creativity is always welcome in our midfield I'd say that our failure to score at home is more about lack of firepower up front. Would Stephen Hughes solve our goalscoring problem or would it have little effect?

Yes, our focus on wing play is very predictable. However we don't need to wait for Stephen Hughes in order to adjust our midfield formation. Central midfield is Nicky Law's preferred option. On Friday I'd like to see a midfield of Humphrey, Jennings, Law and Murphy with Daley partnering Higdon up front, given that Lasley is likely to miss out. Hughes could be used as a sub. Plenty of pace there. That formation may just tempt Hibs to have a real go at us as well.

I totally agree. That said I don't think he's a striker - more an out and out winger. You're right about Michael Higdon too - plenty of flicks, knock downs but no-one to take advantage of them. Jamie has even ended up playing behind Steve Hammell at times when MH is crying out for support. We're doing very well this season as our league position proves, but Jamie is being wasted in the current set up. The reasons for our lacklustre home form are plain for all to see - wrong offensive formation and tactics.

The important thing is that we now have something to remember Phil and his family like it. The Trust and club deserve credit and it was good to hear John Boyle speak. However the actual artwork was as others have said "underwhelming". There is little to connect it with Phil to most outside of Motherwell FC. Best left at that.

That sums it up for me. The weather had little to do with the outcome. With a formation including a solitary striker we were always going to struggle. Despite all our second half pressure, United were the more dangerous team. The lack of strikers is beginning to cause us serious problems. Daley for Murphy or Murphy for Daley is irrelevant. I'm also beginning to question the wisdom of Stephen Hughes. He's only signed until the end of the year and has yet to play a single minute of first team football.

This is a tricky issue for clubs and stewards. I suppose the key for supporters is to choose a location where you're not obscuring any seated fans' views. If you do that then presumably there will be no grounds for complaints. That then gives over zealous stewards less cause to act. We do not want to get into the situation we were in several years ago at a CIS Cup semi final against Celtic at Hampden. Quite a few fans stood up continuously, others behind them objected and then it kicked off. It really boils down to consideration for fellow fans. Show them respect and you've a very strong case indeed.

That was my take on it too. The match commander will want to control this carefully.

A trip to Elgin would have been nice, but a home draw against them or Queens Park isn't bad at all. One of the better draws I'd say.

Has Dundee United acknowledged or replied to the letter of complaint yet? If so what was their response?

I'd be most surprised if the match commander was not involved. Unlikely that stewards would take the decision themselves to eject fans from the ground. This is a very complex issue however and the answer is to create safe standing areas. Certainly I object, and have done, to large numbers of fans standing for 90 minutes and obscuring the view of seated fans who want to sit and repeatedly ignoring requests to sit down. On the other hand I've no objection to smaller groups of fans standing for 90 minutes if they are not bothering fellow seated fans. I've a lot of time for the younger lads who have added a lot of colour, noise and atmosphere to our games this season. In the main they've gone about things in the right way. I'd say to them keep it going and I hope your numbers swell. I'd add a warning though. Because of the Aberdeen incident, the public spotlight will be on you and you'll have to act responsibly. There will be those who will want to have a go at you for whatever reason. Behave responsibly, show respect to fellow fans and you may find yourselves spearheading a growing campaign. If this groundswell gathers momentum, then at some stage clubs, politicians and the authorities will have to become involved. You'll need their support. Good to see the club showing some public support too. Aberdeen will need to look seriously at stewarding issues but that is a separate, but nonetheless very important matter in its own right.

I wasn't at the game and so can't comment in detail. But your point sums it up perfectly for me Andy. Its an awkward issue for clubs but we have to have consistent application of the regulations and there is no sign of that whatsover. If as seems true, Aberdeen fans were allowed to stand unmolested then this raises serious questions.