Lobey_Dosser Posted January 24, 2016 Report Share Posted January 24, 2016 Is our record without Pearson in the team not ridiculously poor? I've campaigned for Cadden to get in the team for a long time but I suspect he'll need a good number of games under his belt on the right before you could consider him stepping in for Pearson in the middle of the park. Ideally our new midfielder will have a bit of dig as well as composure on the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted January 24, 2016 Report Share Posted January 24, 2016 Is our record without Pearson in the team not ridiculously poor?It is aye. This season in the league we've played 7 without him and won 1 (Killie at FP) and drawn 1 (County also at FP). FWIW: Our league record with Hammell starting at left back is: P 10 W 4 D 2 L 4 With Chalmers starting at left back it's: P 10 W 3 D 2 L 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wispy Flossy Posted January 24, 2016 Report Share Posted January 24, 2016 Not overly concerned if we lose Pearo for a game or so, albeit he is doing the business for us. Young Cadden has shown he's capable of stepping into his box to box boots - its the other central midfield positions thats causing us problems. I normally agree with most you normally post but suggesting that cadden can step into Pearson boots after his first full 90 minutes at premiership level is insane. A game where he was directly responsible for one of the two goals which we conceded nonetheless. I think you may need to reign in your expectation of the lad a little, as do many yesterday who thought he was excellent. In my opinion no one was excellent yesterday. A box to box midfielder also needs to have some dig and defensive discipline. I don't see cadden having that yet, although I believe there is some merit in being considered in the role he played yesterday. Cadden (and watt for that matter who many believe should also be in first team) still have a long way to go. They have shown glimpses of being capable but no more than that. This time last season Dom Thomas was flavour of the month on the forum and before that there were even clamours for euan Murray to be included in the first team on the strengths of their performances for the U20's. That level is a million miles from senior level. It's always good to have homegrown local lads in the first team and I hope he, and others, succeeds but we shouldn't be setting unrealistic expectations of them. I'm confident the manager will develop them accordingly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted January 24, 2016 Report Share Posted January 24, 2016 Cadden needs a run of three games or more for us to see what he can do, taking him out the team next week will do nothing for his development. As for the first goal, he was marking someone else when Irvine came late into the box, he had to decide whether to stay with his man or mark Irvine, he decided, probably too late, to follow Irvine but perhaps someone else should have been tracking him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 24, 2016 Report Share Posted January 24, 2016 I normally agree with most you normally post but suggesting that cadden can step into Pearson boots after his first full 90 minutes at premiership level is insane. A game where he was directly responsible for one of the two goals which we conceded nonetheless. I think you may need to reign in your expectation of the lad a little, as do many yesterday who thought he was excellent. In my opinion no one was excellent yesterday. A box to box midfielder also needs to have some dig and defensive discipline. I don't see cadden having that yet, although I believe there is some merit in being considered in the role he played yesterday. I should qualify what I wrote. At this point in time he isn't as good as Pearo, and may never be, who knows. However he made a reasonable start yesterday no more no no less. As you say some have gone overboard. I've always been a great believer in replacing like with like, as far as possible as it keeps the teams shape consistent. As things stand, if Pearo is out for a game or perhaps two I think young Cadden would make a reasonable deputy. I'd rather play him again than another more experienced defensive midfielder (if we had two) or another experienced winger. More than any other area of the team midfield has got to be a blend of the right kind of players and its that that is causing Mark McGhee some trouble at the moment. The midfield wasn't right at Tynecastle and it wasn't right yesterday. He seems to be going through a process of trial and error to find out what combination works and what one doesn't and thats entirely right. So far he's found out what doesn't work although it is a matter of degree. My ideal midfield, if there is such a thing, would comprise a speedy winger, a fit box to box versatile player, a defensive and mobile hardman, and a creative type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Apropos of nothing as you can take numbers and make them fit any narrative but I still found this quite interesting. So far this season by my reckoning we've been able to start with our 5 'experienced' players (Hammell, McManus, Pearson, Lasley, McDonald), 8 times. Our record is; P 8 W 5 D 2 L 1. It's a small sample clearly but it's the results have been against a decent spread of teams in terms of league position: W: ICT, Dundee, Celtic, St Johnstone, Cove D: Hearts, Accies L: Ross County As I've mentioned before on a purely numbers/results basis the 2 players we seem to miss most are Pearson and Lasley so McGhee's bang on the money in identifying it as the area that needs dealt with. As has been pointed out others have tried to address it but it's clearly difficult to get the right bodies in. Edit to add: again a fairly dull point, and I could be wrong on this, but watching Fox tip Lasley's shot over the bar I was wondering: am I right in saying that so far this season we haven't scored from outside the box? All our goals have been inside the area? Don't get me wrong, goals are goals but just seemed surprising to be this far into the season and that to be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 As I've mentioned before on a purely numbers/results basis the 2 players we seem to miss most are Pearson and Lasley so McGhee's bang on the money in identifying it as the area that needs dealt with. As has been pointed out others have tried to address it but it's clearly difficult to get the right bodies in. Overall, I agree but it depends what our managers have been looking for and ultimately their views on how the game should be played. Mark McGhee likes a strong powerful midfield and he's right, saying a few years ago "every team needs a hard midfielder to stand on heads". He also knows we are weak there and likely to become even weaker unless action is taken. As I've written elsewhere, the midfield is a complex area of a team and needs the right mix of players there. One of my favourite players in the past was Vic Davidson but theres no way I'd want 3 or even 2 of his type in a midfield. Despite signing Steve Jennings, Stuart McCall did not like hard, defensive midfielders and did not go down that route. When Jennings departed he was not replaced. From what I've been led to believe, and yes its an unconfirmed rumour, Ian Baraclough signed Theo Robinson in preference to forking out the cash for Jackson Irvine. So I'm just not sure what kind of midfield Stuart McCall and Ian Baraclough actually wanted. Ostensibly it does seem that defensive midfielders are like gold dust but I'm not so sure. An oversimplification I know but successful sides like Inverness, St Johnstone and Ross County all have hard, physical and hard working midfields who get wired in or if that isn't enough, put the boot in in a surreptitious manner and their approach is based on that type of engine room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I am sure someone posted in here tbat Irvine is apparently on more in wages than we were prepared to pay in our current structure. Overheard a club official at a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Overall, I agree but it depends what our managers have been looking for and ultimately their views on how the game should be played. Mark McGhee likes a strong powerful midfield and he's right, saying a few years ago "every team needs a hard midfielder to stand on heads". He also knows we are weak there and likely to become even weaker unless action is taken. As I've written elsewhere, the midfield is a complex area of a team and needs the right mix of players there. One of my favourite players in the past was Vic Davidson but theres no way I'd want 3 or even 2 of his type in a midfield. Despite signing Steve Jennings, Stuart McCall did not like hard, defensive midfielders and did not go down that route. When Jennings departed he was not replaced. From what I've been led to believe, and yes its an unconfirmed rumour, Ian Baraclough signed Theo Robinson in preference to forking out the cash for Jackson Irvine. So I'm just not sure what kind of midfield Stuart McCall and Ian Baraclough actually wanted. Ostensibly it does seem that defensive midfielders are like gold dust but I'm not so sure. An oversimplification I know but successful sides like Inverness, St Johnstone and Ross County all have hard, physical and hard working midfields who get wired in or if that isn't enough, put the boot in in a surreptitious manner and their approach is based on that type of engine room. I think ostensibly we're arguing the same point more or less and that is that it's about balance. Whatever question Baraclough was looking to address the answer wasn't Jake Taylor, we didn't win a game in which he started while Grimshaw supported both Pearson and Lasley ably when Lasley dropped out we struggled (see ICT 1-3 at Fir Park) though that may also have had as much to do with our default being to bring in Ainsworth and go 442 with 2 wingers in such a scenario. That's not to say that he couldn't have grown into that role however it's academic anyway since he's now a Preston player. I'm not necessarily arguing we need like for like replacements for both in the way that we seemed to stockpile right backs for a while simply that it'd be good to have someone in that would allow us to keep an effective blend in midfield. For example if someone can come in and allow us to rotate Pearson, Lasley and Cadden (or whoever the younger player that is played alongside them is) whilst still being competitive then that would be ideal. Either way I'm interested to see who/what type of player we bring in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Yes it will be interesting. Will it be a talented creative midfielder in the Nicky Law mould; will it be a defensive hard man like Steve Jennings or Stewart MacLaren; or an upmarket Mark Fitzpatrick type quiet grafter like Liam Grimshaw. What about a useful jack of all trades type as a replacement for Keith Lasley? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelman1991 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Overall, I agree but it depends what our managers have been looking for and ultimately their views on how the game should be played. Mark McGhee likes a strong powerful midfield and he's right, saying a few years ago "every team needs a hard midfielder to stand on heads". He also knows we are weak there and likely to become even weaker unless action is taken. As I've written elsewhere, the midfield is a complex area of a team and needs the right mix of players there. One of my favourite players in the past was Vic Davidson but theres no way I'd want 3 or even 2 of his type in a midfield. Despite signing Steve Jennings, Stuart McCall did not like hard, defensive midfielders and did not go down that route. When Jennings departed he was not replaced. From what I've been led to believe, and yes its an unconfirmed rumour, Ian Baraclough signed Theo Robinson in preference to forking out the cash for Jackson Irvine. So I'm just not sure what kind of midfield Stuart McCall and Ian Baraclough actually wanted. Ostensibly it does seem that defensive midfielders are like gold dust but I'm not so sure. An oversimplification I know but successful sides like Inverness, St Johnstone and Ross County all have hard, physical and hard working midfields who get wired in or if that isn't enough, put the boot in in a surreptitious manner and their approach is based on that type of engine room. Agree with a lot of that - but these teams that you mention all seem able to produce/buy reasonable 'combatitive midfielders' - our scouting system in recent years has proven poor, particularly in that area - hopefully something McGhee can rectify. Oh and by the way - wasn't it Jim Gannon who signed Jennings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 these teams that you mention all seem able to produce/buy reasonable 'combatitive midfielders' - our scouting system in recent years has proven poor, particularly in that area - hopefully something McGhee can rectify. Oh and by the way - wasn't it Jim Gannon who signed Jennings? Yes, good point - they do and thats why its puzzling for me that we can't seem to find any players in this mould. Jim Gannon did indeed sign Jennings but did Stuart McCall not award him an extension? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I am sure someone posted in here tbat Irvine is apparently on more in wages than we were prepared to pay in our current structure. Overheard a club official at a game.Their rich owner pumps cash into the club,ours gives us tic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dezz Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 The clear out has begun then ... Port Vale sign Theo Robinson on a permanent deal until the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graeme Bremner Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 The clear out has begun then ... Port Vale sign Theo Robinson on a permanent deal until the end of the season. really or is this like the ainsworth to Scunthorpe deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well-Made Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Was just going to post. http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Port-Vale-transfer-news-Valiants-sign-Derby/story-28599228-detail/story.html From Port Vale's site http://www.port-vale.co.uk/news/article/robinson-makes-vale-park-switch-2919844.aspx Port Vale manager Rob Page has secured his second signing of the day with the addition of striker Theo Robinson. He’s a striker who looks to run in behind and score goals." Rob Page, Manager The 27-year-old has joined the Club on a contract which will run until the end of the season following his departure from Motherwell and could make his debut against former side Doncaster Rovers on Tuesday evening, subject to international clearance. Robinson started his career at Watford and has enjoyed permanent spells at Huddersfield Town, Millwall, at the Keepmoat Stadium, Derby County and, most recently, at Fir Park. Though he was born in Birmingham, the forward is a Jamaican international and has made five appearances for his country. Robinson has been allocated the number 25 shirt at Vale Park. Vale boss Rob Page told port-vale.co.uk: “We’re over the moon to have added Theo to the squad. “He’s a striker who looks to run in behind and score goals and he’s got vast experience in the Football League as well.” Read more at http://www.port-vale.co.uk/news/article/robinson-makes-vale-park-switch-2919844.aspx#B0kZiLkz2KggQEB2.99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dezz Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 really or is this like the ainsworth to Scunthorpe dealConfirmed by BBC Radio Stoke and also on Twitter. Nothing from either club yet though, as far as I can see. Edit - now confirmed by Port Vale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Good move for both parties. He will maybe play some football that he wasnt going to get with us and frees up a wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Yes, good point - they do and thats why its puzzling for me that we can't seem to find any players in this mould. Jim Gannon did indeed sign Jennings but did Stuart McCall not award him an extension? I thought he only signed a 1 year deal with Gannon and Brown re-signed him, then he signed another year for McCall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Theo Robinson contributed little. He didn't get many chances but his performances didn't really justify the manager giving him another chance. His time here frankly wasn't memorable enough for his name to even come up in years to come when we talk of worst ever Motherwell teams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Robinson deal confirmed on our side now as well. https://twitter.com/MotherwellFC/status/691621684084891649 Makes sense for all concerned. Moult and McDonald are pretty firmly established first choice pairing and justifiably so. It's fair enough that he's gone looking to get games. I suppose he could easily just have let his contract wind down up here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Was just going to post. http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/Port-Vale-transfer-news-Valiants-sign-Derby/story-28599228-detail/story.html From Port Vale's site http://www.port-vale.co.uk/news/article/robinson-makes-vale-park-switch-2919844.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Simply didn't work out for either party. Best for all that he moved on. Hopefully the money saved on wages can be reinvested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Hes a striker who looks to run in behind and score goals and hes got vast experience in the Football League as well. You sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fizoxy Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 To be fair, what someone "looks" to do and what other people will let them do can often be two very different things. But he does have experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts