joewarkfanclub Posted July 20 Report Share Posted July 20 All a bit ponderous again today. Thought we started poorly and caused ourselves problems with poor concentration at the back. Two up front certainly helped fashion a few more chances but we didnt take enough of them to put the game to bed and it gave us much less control of the midfield. Still not a fan of 3 at the back without the dynamic wing backs to support it, but no signs of SK going to a 4 even with his current limited options. Still, we got the job done and its another 90 mins closer to full fitness. Just hope some of our injured/new players are a bit closer to a start for next week. Onwards and upwards..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted July 20 Report Share Posted July 20 6 hours ago, Yodo said: Typical happy clapper . If we can’t wipe the floor with lower leagues teams then we are in a bad way . Off course when we went on no win run every other week the fans said it can only get better how wrong they were See honestly, i was off SO for a while because of this kind of post. No idea why this guy hasn’t been banned. It’s boring, banal troll shite. Genuinely, what does this guy bring to the forum? 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 I don't use it myself (I just scroll past posts I don't want to read) - but we do have an Ignore option available. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelmaninOZ Posted July 21 Author Report Share Posted July 21 He enjoyed the game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirParkCornerExile Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 6 hours ago, Stevie73 said: Thought Blaney was dreadful today, needs to be taught how to time his jump, think he won one header today, then when the big boy Logan came on he just got plain bullied. Hard watch today, easy to blame the surface but our passing and movement needs to improve. I actually thought some of our passing was decent in spells and on thar surface its always a struggle. We got into good positions but Moses and Roberston were'nt up to finishing some of it off. Far from a sterling performance but I do think there are signs it might be OK. Final cross ball into the area still a really weak point. Blaney cant dominate as he should for a guy of his size. Marks outta 10 I'd say 5/6. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 33 minutes ago, weeyin said: I don't use it myself (I just scroll past posts I don't want to read) - but we do have an Ignore option available. Shouldn’t really have to use it though? I genuinely mean it, this is why this forum is dying. It’s not steelboy and mjc, those boys are negative but they have good arguments mostly, but Yodo is a troll. He was years ago when I was last on here, and he’s still here. Sort it out guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 For others it is steelboy and mjc. Steelboy just blurts out how useless SK, Slattery, Halliday, Spittal, Higdon etc. etc. and every window says we should sign some unicorn striker he never names. (And then those players leave, complains we're struggling to replace them). And MJC is just a self-parody, predicting we'll lose every game and get relegated every season. But that's my opinion, which is obviously different from yours - which is why moderation isn't always the answer. Despite the red title on my profile, I don't actually perform moderation duties; I have that for other admin stuff. The biggest challenge, however, is that the guys don't read every post in every thread - or if they do, it might be a few days later. They try to take a light touch, relying on self-moderation where possible. But every report is read and dealt with as they see fit. Everyone has day job (and a life), however, and checking in here is not always possible. I've been on the internet for so long, my brain automatically skips over the trolls and wind-up merchants, but I get that is not true for everyone. 35 years ago, the advice was "don't feed the trolls" - it's still true today. If nobody responds, they get bored and start fishing elsewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yodo Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 5 hours ago, Tamwell said: Shouldn’t really have to use it though? I genuinely mean it, this is why this forum is dying. It’s not steelboy and mjc, those boys are negative but they have good arguments mostly, but Yodo is a troll. He was years ago when I was last on here, and he’s still here. Sort it out guys. Just to say Tam I’m not a troll never have been if somebody has an opinion that’s different to mine I don’t call them a troll. I give an honest opinion after every game but it’s only my opinion I will not say we played well when we haven’t and I don’t think Kettlewell reads SOL so does it really matter . I will continue to give my thoughts on my team and if u don’t like it just skip my posts . Hope u enjoy the league season after all it’s only a game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 2 minutes ago, Yodo said: Just to say Tam I’m not a troll never have been if somebody has an opinion that’s different to mine I don’t call them a troll. I give an honest opinion after every game but it’s only my opinion I will not say we played well when we haven’t and I don’t think Kettlewell reads SOL so does it really matter . I will continue to give my thoughts on my team and if u don’t like it just skip my posts . Hope u enjoy the league season after all it’s only a game Thank you for your polite response. You are, by definition, a troll though. i quite enjoy the debate that posters like mjc and steelboy bring to the forum, do I agree with them? No, but they at least bring structure and an alternative viewpoint (both critical factors to a discussion) Can you honestly say that you bring these things to the table? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yodo Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 4 minutes ago, Tamwell said: Thank you for your polite response. You are, by definition, a troll though. i quite enjoy the debate that posters like mjc and steelboy bring to the forum, do I agree with them? No, but they at least bring structure and an alternative viewpoint (both critical factors to a discussion) Can you honestly say that you bring these things to the table? As I said I give a honest opinion , if the team or players play bad I say so if somebody tells me like yesterday they played well then we can debate it . There has been no improvement from last season yet . We have done what Kettlewell does throws net over a number of players and hope he gets at least one decent player . The good thing is the only way is up but in my opinion not with this squad of players Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 One definition of an internet troll is "a person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content". Now thats a pretty wide definition. In my book, it clearly includes someone who makes personal remarks, bullies other posters, singles other posters out for "special mention or treatment" (excluding engaging in constructive debate) or is abusive. Thats the easy bit, or maybe its not so easy. Its not so easy to decide if someone is troll if they post ridiculous comments - it might be that they just hold ridiculous views. It happens. The problem then becomes who decides the definition of a ridiculous view and why a poster has posted them? What we have to avoid at all costs, is to label someone a troll if they hold diametrically opposite views to us. Our support contains extremes of optimism and pessimism and a whole range in between. Personally I like to read views which are diametrically opposite to my own as it helps me test and challenge my own perspectives and understand where others are coming from. I'd say that the mods and admin on here do a pretty good job. The problem is that we don't know what we don't know - the unseen work that they do quietly in the background. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 15 hours ago, Kmcalpin said: After our result at Montrose, a win will be the only acceptable result for us. Even if we'd picked up all 3 points in Angus that might not have been enough, given Thistle's better goal scoring record. They'll be delighted to lose on penalties next week given their superior goal difference. We have to win simples. However, the players are getting match fitter and we've yet to field our strongest 11 from those we have available. If we had won in Montrose and both teams had 3 wins then goal difference would be irrelevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 I've just watched the highlights from yesterday's game. Some good attacking moves, although much of it was unproductive. Stuparevic's goal was a real thing of beauty. Hopefully a lot more of that to come. As for Clyde's goal - it was one we conceded many times last year. A real team effort. A mistake in giving the ball the ball away; attackers given loads of space; the midfield retreating into our own box; and 2 totally unmarked attackers lining up to have a crack at goal about 15 yards out. Where was our midfield?? A lot of comment was made last year about the state of our central defence and we'll leave that aside for now, but it seems our defensive midfield weakness has not been addressed by new arrivals. Early days but I hope we get our house in order for next Sunday and the Ross County opener. I suspect SK will make a few changes from yesterday that will keep Partick on their toes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 8 minutes ago, ropy said: If we had won in Montrose and both teams had 3 wins then goal difference would be irrelevant Yes, you're right of course. A draw after 90 minutes next Sunday might have been enough for us, if we'd have won on penalties. Assuming Partick win this midweek, then they can afford to draw whereas we now have to win to finish top. We have to finish a point above them and that can only be achieved by beating them outright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamwell Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 24 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said: One definition of an internet troll is "a person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content". Like dismissing someone’s point of view because they are a “happy clapper”? I’ve said previously that differing points of view are critical for a discussion, that remains true, but please note posters who only appear when we’re not playing particularly well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 58 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said: As for Clyde's goal - it was one we conceded many times last year. A real team effort. A mistake in giving the ball the ball away; attackers given loads of space; the midfield retreating into our own box; and 2 totally unmarked attackers lining up to have a crack at goal about 15 yards out. Where was our midfield?? A lot of comment was made last year about the state of our central defence and we'll leave that aside for now, but it seems our defensive midfield weakness has not been addressed by new arrivals. I've not watched it back but it felt like the midfield was running out because all Moses had to do was play it back to a defender to give them an out ball and... Didn't. Also, I think one of our defenders fell over looking for a foul that never came and (eventually) got back up, hideously out of position, which isn't a good look. I do think you're right, we had a lot of midfielders looking to get forward yesterday which often left Davor isolated. On a slightly related note; is Balmer injured? I cannot understand why he's not starting over Casey or Blaney. I thought Blaney did well on Tuesday but Donachie bullied him all day yesterday and he didn't cope well. Casey's distribution outside the odd good ball in behind was laborious and inaccurate again, he pinged a pass at SODs chest high like an Exocet from 10 yards away and complained when he didn't get it under control. Madness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 48 minutes ago, Tamwell said: Like dismissing someone’s point of view because they are a “happy clapper”? I’ve said previously that differing points of view are critical for a discussion, that remains true, but please note posters who only appear when we’re not playing particularly well. Fair enough Tam. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 9 hours ago, FirParkCornerExile said: I actually thought some of our passing was decent in spells and on thar surface its always a struggle. We got into good positions but Moses and Roberston were'nt up to finishing some of it off. Far from a sterling performance but I do think there are signs it might be OK. Final cross ball into the area still a really weak point. Blaney cant dominate as he should for a guy of his size. Marks outta 10 I'd say 5/6. SOD set up at least four fairly straight forward chances but others made a hash of finishing. I thought both he and Wilson did what was asked of them but lapses elsewhere stopped us strolling to a far more comfortable scoreline. Similar to Montrose. Miller clearly a class above, especially when the movement of others stretched opponents creating space. His penalty was class. I also thought Paton looked much more effective running from deep. Please SK, no more having him as the main support for a loan striker. For the second game running Halliday showed he may have a big part to play. Surprised Balmer did not feature. Not convinced yet with the back three we saw as a unit yesterday. Hopefully we can identify the best partnerships as no doubt they all have something about them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 17 minutes ago, dennyc said: Surprised Balmer did not feature. Not convinced yet with the back three we saw as a unit yesterday. Hopefully we can identify the best partnerships as no doubt they all have something about them. I was too, but I wondered if he's maybe carrying a niggle and they didn't want to risk him on that surface; similar with Seddon staying on the bench. One thing I'll say for Wilson; whilst he's not set the left wing back role alight like Gent did last season, he's got two assists in three games now and arguably should've had more had Moses not shanked a few chances. One other thing to add is that I was impressed with Wells when he came on; took the ball to feet and ran at the opposition. He made a couple of poor decisions in and around the box (passed when he should've shot etc.) but it definitely feels like there's a player in there. Still not sure what his best position is, though. He did drift wider at points and I quite like the idea of him having a free(ish) role as a 10, or as one of the 10s with Stuparevic playing a more "rigid" support striker type of role to Robinson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJC Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 19 hours ago, Spiderpig said: Have a day off and stop talking pish. What he said was correct, Clyde could easily have scored a few more and we were far from comfortable. Just because a post or a particular posters view doesn’t sit right with the way you want to see things doesn’t make it pish. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelman1991 Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 Geez this place gets depressing at times. We were quite comfortable yesterday and on another day might have added another 2 or 3 to our goal tally. Thought the front 2 gelled well and Robinson looks like he could be handful for defenders this season. One thing though I don’t see the back 3 who started yesterday being the 3 we start with on opening day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsterwood Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 24 minutes ago, MJC said: What he said was correct, Clyde could easily have scored a few more and we were far from comfortable. Just because a post or a particular posters view doesn’t sit right with the way you want to see things doesn’t make it pish. Disagree. Though we controlled game. We created far more than Clyde. New cf and wells looked good coming on. Positives there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 It's funny that after all the years we've been playing this League Cup group format, some people don't quite get we need to treat it, at least in part, as pre-season. Players are at all different levels of fitness depending on injuries, being out of the game, coming from different leagues etc. and the gaffer needs to balance finding a team that will win, a team that will give players needed minutes and a team that doesn't add to the crock list. Having said all that, I'm not a fan of Casey and Blaney in the same team. They were at the heart of many of our defensive lapses last season, and not convinced they will be any better together this season. A win's a win, though and that is all that matters in a cup competition. Just ask England. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJC Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 4 minutes ago, robsterwood said: Disagree. Though we controlled game. We created far more than Clyde. New cf and wells looked good coming on. Positives there. We were the better side I’m not disputing that but we could easily have conceded more and did not look comfortable defending our lead, we never do especially under Kettlewell’s management. There were positives for us as you say and the biggest one of the lot is that we won the game which is the main thing in these games but performance wise we need to see an improvement if we aren’t to see a re-run of last season. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grizzlyg Posted July 21 Report Share Posted July 21 12 hours ago, weeyin said: I don't use it myself (I just scroll past posts I don't want to read) - but we do have an Ignore option available. Aw naw don't tell folk about that, my name will be blacklisted by everyone 🤪🤪🤪 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.