MelvinBragg

Thanks. I thought I had misread that until I saw your reply...

I haven't seen Ojala or Shields yet. Having seen the rest of them, Slattery and Kelly look good enough, O'Connor looks to have potential. Van Veen, Woolery and Amaluzor don't look anywhere near good enough. They might come good but so far they look like out of their depth...

I'd be astounded. Plays for Galatasaray. Outwith our budget on that basis...

McGinlay also...

Are you sure? He played for Manchester United U23s as a trialist last night...

Correct. Huge issue on Sunday was the lack of options on the bench...

Pretty sure there will be clubs that took advantage of a loan and still charged their fans for season tickets. At least our supporters are getting an obvious benefit from it...

Jester shirt was fine. Shorts were the problem...

Ideal result for us. Chasing the ball for much of the game in that heat but still in the tie so will have at least one eye on next Thursday, which wouldn't have been the case had they been pumped 4-0...

I actually think 442 is less cautious than 433, given our wide players in a 442 will offer not much going back the way. The idea of playing Watt behind Woolery and Van Veen is fine in principle if Watt can be coached to think like a midfielder. If not, it's just 433 with a deep lying striker. If you want to start cautiously, with our squad it's 352.. Again you're only playing 3 central midfielders but you've got protection behind them. Kelly Mugabi O'Connor Lamie O'Donnell Slattery Donnelly Maguire Carroll Watt Van Veen Not a huge fan as I feel it can turn into 532 very easily and hand too much initiative to the opposition but if you're looking for a cautious approach, this is how I would go..

Again I ask the question, what formation are you using? 442? Who is playing wide midfield in your 442? Will your wide men really operate as wide midfielders or wingers, as I suspect Woolery and Amaluzor would do? So you would effectively be playing 424. I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm having a go at you personally but the idea that 442 helps you win midfield is a nonsense unless it's a Terry Butcher style midfield with Pearson and Lasley at wide midfield. The last 442 we played to any kind of positive effect was McGhee second time around and that was a squinty 442 with 3 midfielders and one winger, so basically a 433.. The idea of only playing two central midfielders is a nonsense. Teams playing 343 invariably have two attacking midfielders in the front three who drop in to prevent being outnumbered. The 4231 is basically a 433 as the central figure in the '3' is a midfielder, who drops in. I seem to recall 352 taking a beating on here during periods when Robinson's team performed poorly. And likewise 433 when he used that. The only time I ever agreed with Maurice Malpas was when he said formations don't win you games, players do. The obsession with 'only' having three in midfield is a red herring. On Sunday we weren't tirng because we were chasing possession so much as we were tiring because of the lack of options on the bench. Hibs were able to freshen things up with no real drop off in quality. We couldn't... Obviously if someone comes up with a way to play four in midfield, I'm all ears...

What formation would you play?

Is there an option for muting posts from certain posters so I can't see it? If so, how...

Yawn....

Was about to post likewise in the match thread. First eleven looks ok-ish (assuming Ojala shores up the defence). But as we tired, our options off the bench were not going to win us the game. Maybe Shields will be one but probably another attacker required...

Ceremonial role and Alexamder has said as much previously in that he wants several leaders in the team. Given the captain is supposed to be the only player allowed to approach the ref, it might not be the worst idea in the world ro have a Scottish international doing it....

Why the banging of the head emoji?

I suspect you may be disappointed. We currently have five centre halfs on our books plus Devine. We have five centre midfielders plus Cornelius. If Devine and Cornelius aren't going to be considered as first team options at their current age, there was no point in re signing them. So six players in each position. You can quibble about the quality, but the numbers are there. For me, to bring in someone else, you need to free up a wage. Up front is slightly different, 3 centre forwards and 3 wingers (I'm including Lawless here). No youngsters breaking through. Maybe another body required there but please not another 'can play anywhere in the front three'. Give me a striker or a winger, not someone who can 'do a job in both positions...

I have to admit to having mixed feelings on Alexamder. Results in the second half of last season were apparently good (I kept seeing form tables posted that had us top four since his arrival) but there's something about him that I'm not convinced by. I had the same feeling about McGhee first time round (second time round, I already knew he was a fraud). Nothing I can put my finger on, just something makes me sceptical about him. Having said this, I find it interesting that people are concerned about the defence. The manager did manage to pick up results with a back four of O'Donnell Mugabi Lamie McGinlay last season. And even when Gallagher came back, he was seldom the best defender on the day. That was with Crawford protecting the back four. Surely Donnelly will offer more. I'm aware we've looked a bit open in the league cup but that's a new young centre half and Donnelly returning slowly to fitness in front of him. My concern would be scoring goals. I like the look of Woolery but his choice not to cut back to Watt on Saturday when he had no angle to score concerned me. Decision making questionable. Van Veen? Unconvincing in front of goal no matter how good his link play is. A lot riding on Shields coming back and making an impact. I fear we're all going to be muttering "Big Devante would have put that away.." Just need to wait and see. I'm not all doom and gloom as some are. Would just feel better if I could see where the goals were coming from...

Ah, fair enough...

Guessing or a rumour doing the rounds?

You do realise that since around 1988, we've maybe have 4 or 5 creative midfielders, meaning someone who can thread a killer pass. Often we have favoured ball carriers who create by breaking the lines (Pearson, Law, O'Donnell are all prime examples of this) . These are more common. Basically don't expect a replacement for Turnbull. We don't have that type of player that often...

So wr have established that it needs to be 433 or 352? Good. We can bin the 442 and 343 shite that leaves us outmanned in midfield...

I find that interesting given it was announced on Saturday that Season Ticket holders had until 6pm on Tuesday 27th to confirm their intention to attend...

If he was examined properly and found to be fit, there would be other clubs he'd be signing for ahead of us. He only signs for us if there's a concern over his durability. So no thanks...