WilliePettigrew Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 After being a half-time substitution in this the begining of the end for Craggs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 NO!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patons02 Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 After not starting is it the beginning of the end for Slane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 So every time one of the older yins is subbed or left oot it's the end is it? FFS manager made a call, got it right, nae need tae look further intae it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fat_tony Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 After being a half-time substitution in this the begining of the end for Craggs? Because he didn't have the best game and got subbed? He's the only experienced centre half we've got at the club and is a cracking defender. He'll get over it and be back in the team if not next week then soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliePettigrew Posted August 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Gannon has already made it clear he is not a Craggs fan and I think todays decision albeit the correct one will have left Craggs with a lot of thinking to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 The defending second half was comical at times and i thought he was missed as for hammell that moment when the ball was passed to him and he was staring into the crowd and it rolled past him for a throw that was shocking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Gannon has already made it clear he is not a Craggs fan and I think todays decision albeit the correct one will have left Craggs with a lot of thinking to do. It's NOT the end.....but this statement is also true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Gannon has already made it clear he is not a Craggs fan and I think todays decision albeit the correct one will have left Craggs with a lot of thinking to do. Your correct but he answer is still NO!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeboy Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 It was a bold move from Gannon but one which paid off. If it was me, I'd say Hammell was far worse, so I'd have put Reynolds at left back and hooked him. I don't think Craigan did that much wrong. I think it would be an awful move to get rid of him, and it's just a total non starter. Off the top of my head, I can only remember us beating Accies in his absence over the past few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David MFC Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 i think we are readingg far to much intoo this to be honnest. remember everyone jumped to the conclusion that after craggs whole hearted wave after the llanelli awayy game they thought he was off ? this is just the samee thing, people having nothin better to do on a saturdayy night than read to far intoo things. he was subbed as the way gannon set the team out to play in the first half was all wrong. sutton was a no-body agains st johnsons two centre halfs, they were bossin him, so gannon corectly changed it to a wayy that did'nt suit them ... byy taking of craggs and putting reynolds into his more suited centre back position and brought on young mchugh who looked to be a real handfull. i don't think that this is the end for craggs, his experience is priceless and i think people are just looking into it far too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnstone Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 It was a bold move from Gannon but one which paid off. If it was me, I'd say Hammell was far worse, so I'd have put Reynolds at left back and hooked him. I don't think Craigan did that much wrong. I think it would be an awful move to get rid of him, and it's just a total non starter. Off the top of my head, I can only remember us beating Accies in his absence over the past few years. Did taking Craigan pay off though? I agree about Sutton, but not sure why he took of Craigan and we were still a shambles at the back in the second half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeboy Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 The Sutton gamble definitely did, as did Craigan's on paper, as we were losing when he went off and ended up with a point. However, our defending was still shambolic at times, and you always feel more comfortable with him in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Gannon's continually asking the players to play high tempo balls on the deck - and Craigan plays the ball long and high (more often than not in the direction of Sutton, funnily enough). I thought at the game and on the ALBA replay Reynolds looked to do that as often as he could - I think he'll be our future captain under Gannon. If Dundee come in on Monday with twa beano's and a roller skate for hammel - I'd take it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I prefer players getting hooked after 45 rather than 85 when its to late Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David MFC Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I prefer players getting hooked after 45 rather than 85 when its to late brings back mcghee memories thats if he even made a sub when we were playing pishh ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sdt Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Who was made captain after Craigan went off? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Reynoldo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claretbandonambershirt Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 After being a half-time substitution in this the begining of the end for Craggs? Good question. I think Gannon made the substitution because of his philosophy, in the sense that if you don't provide what he deems necessary, you will be subbed. Seems harsh but also, it does give other players the constant opportunity of getting into the game and making a name for themselves. I like Craggs immensley and maybe he is in the loop with Gannon as to the team tactics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star sail Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I don't think it is the end for Crag's and I hope it's not but I would say that all is not well with the relationship between Captain and Manager at the moment. As someone said about, Gannon appears to want snappy passes played on the deck. As we know Craigan likes to play long balls and his accuracy at times is woeful. Watching Gannon at some of the Euro games, you could see his frustrations when Craigan was playing these balls and what's more he was no shy about letting him know. For me the alarm bells from yesterday was not the change at Half Time but Gannons comments on why he made the change. He mentioned wanting players on the park who were showing energy and enthusiasm. That suggests that he felt Craigan was showing neither. I think that if Craigan wants a future at the club he will have to swallow his bride a bit and change to play the way the manager wants. The question is can he do this after playing a certain way for so long? Finally it's a high risk stratagy if Gannon does make an enemy of Craigan. If things go well then no problem but if we are struggling supporters and the media (as Craigan is a bit of a media darling) will turn and use Craigans absence as the cause of the problems (as per Christmas last year). I hope Craigan does adapt and goes on to have the best season he has had in years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trucks Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Lets hope so, he's living on a past reputation and I don't think Gannon gives a fuck about it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 For me the alarm bells from yesterday was not the change at Half Time but Gannons comments on why he made the change. He mentioned wanting players on the park who were showing energy and enthusiasm. That suggests that he felt Craigan was showing neither. Finally it's a high risk stratagy if Gannon does make an enemy of Craigan. If things go well then no problem but if we are struggling supporters and the media (as Craigan is a bit of a media darling) will turn and use Craigans absence as the cause of the problems (as per Christmas last year). That's it in a nutshell for me. His comments were more striking than the actual change. The risk is that Craigan (I would imagine) is a respected figure in the dressing room. Any perceived poor treatment of him might result in alienating some of the players who've grown up round the club and look up to Craigan... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Craigen as by no means the worst player in the first half. That honour clearly goes to Hammell. Sutton was left on his own up front which meant any ball he did win from the long punts up the park just fell to the Saints defenders. A thankless task. Murphy could not get going in the first half and was not effective. Pity because Hateley did well going forward and often looked to link up with Murphy. Credit to JG for the changes he made at half time......unlike previous Managers he seems prepared to alter things if HIS original tactics are not working. Also, again unlike previous Managers, if players do not follow his instructions he has the guts to substitute them. We started playing football on the deck and players such as Murphy and Forbes were able to contribute much more. It was good to see us going at Saints and giving them something to think about. It's also a learning experience for JG as he finds out how the other teams in the League approach games. First time round I guess we will see tactics being changed quite often. I think the problem Gannon has with Craigen is that he expects his central defenders to play or carry the ball forward through the midfield whereas Craigen wants to plays the long ball most of the time which completely ignores the midfield. Reynolds is much more confident about pushing forward from defence and playing through midfield. I find the left back position more worrying as Hammell is a better player than he is showing at present and his time must run out soon if he does not get back on track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I think that if Craigan wants a future at the club he will have to swallow his bride a bit That's a bit extreme is it not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trucks Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 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.