Gamst Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 not a bad game to watch the day, bringing on JOB for forbes may have cost us the three points but ruddy saved us from losing 1. We had a good start and aberdeen were nowhere but credit to them they came out all guns blazin for the second half. how far back did the whole team sit? never pushed out our own half, forbes may have been better to play a bit of keep ball and slow down their attack. i think i'm having some sort of break down with all these draws, i'm missing the win/loss rollercoaster! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Was Forbes injured? If not I agree with Al B. The change in our shape fucked us up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcol Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 . forbes may have been better to play a bit of keep ball and slow down their attack. Every time I have seen Forbes this is the opposite of what he does. He has been critisised on this forum for giving the ball away to easily and this is possibly why Jim Gannon replaced him at half time ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ram 89 Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 We've got to start converting some of these draws into wins. St.Mirren a few weeks back was a good point won as we were down 3 - 1 with 10 minutes to go. Games against the likes of Aberdeen and Hamilton are the one's where we've got to be able to take our chances to see teams off because there are some shocking teams in this league imo eg Hearts, Aberdeen, Accies, Kilmarnock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted November 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Time and time and time again we didn't put any pressure on the ball when they had it. We sat off them and didn't get tight enough at any stage allowing them time to play their pass. Looked very disorganised at times with no-one picking up. We didn't heed theses warnings and it was no surprise when they finally equalised. In the end lucky to get a point, but on another day could just have easily have won it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamst Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Every time I have seen Forbes this is the opposite of what he does. He has been critisised on this forum for giving the ball away to easily and this is possibly why Jim Gannon replaced him at half time ! ok so maybe jennings or lasley would have been the right move then if he just had to change it. i liked the kind of chelsea diamond we were playing in the first half, seemed to be linking everyone well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yir Elder Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 It was the definitive game of two halves. We were on top in the first forty five, despite them having two great chances. Dingus must've put a rocket up the Dons at half time as the came out the traps flying. We never really got going until after they equalised, but in the end a draw as the fairest outcome. Two points dropped or one gained? Bit of both probably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Gannon obviously thought we'd play better with O'Brien on. It didn't work, shit happens, we move on. A good point considering how shite the second half was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaag Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Gannon obviously thought we'd play better with O'Brien on. It didn't work, shit happens, we move on. A good point considering how shite the second half was. agreed. Would still have been amazing to beat them though, ach well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 I'm upset to see that there was only one paedophile chant. I am more upset that all the internet hard men who has threatened to punch a member of the board did run over and try to leather this guy cos he was a big scary bastard. But they probably seen that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 I am more upset that all the internet hard men who has threatened to punch a member of the board did run over and try to leather this guy cos he was a big scary bastard. But they probably seen that. Whit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 first half great effort, after that we were fucked. if mcdonald hadn't been sent off i'd have put money on aberdeen winning. the consenus on here is that murphy is only effective when he plays in the middle because he can move away from defenders with his first touch while he's trapped when he's playing out wide. second half he's playing wide right. we start the second half with murphy and o'brien on the wings which means means we've got four out and out attackers versus 3 in the first half. aberdeen put us on the back foot and it was obvious we were going to buckle. we had half an hour to change the pattern of the game and put in either jennings or lasley to shore things up but gannon obviously didn't seemed concerned by the warning signs and they scored via their pressure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Thought the substitution was a crazy one, that's twice in a row now. Every gamble Gannon took in terms of personnel has worked before the last two games, but I believe those two substitutions have cost us four points. In the first half we played really well, and although Aberdeen had two glaring chances, we seemed to be on top of them, and the diamond formation seemed to be working well, but for whatever reason Gannon thought it needed changed, and although he was by no manner brilliant, I thought that was the best Forbes has played for 2-3 games. It did feel like a defeat a bit, but we really can't grumble with one defeat in twelve, we do need to start getting a cutting edge though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Sorry did not I meant to say. MDW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Ahhh. That's less interesting tbh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 since the st johnstone game gannon has been guilty of thinking he can effect the outcome of a game from the sideline. we turned things round in perth but gannon in the papers creditied it to the fact craigan and sutton were subbed off when it was clearly because of the change to 4-5-1 to 4-4-2. has anyone ever seen a manger so keen to make personnel or tactical changes before the second half starts? i watch a lot of football and i can't think of any other manager who is similar. we're paying the price of gannon thinking that he can have more effect on a match than the guys on the park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Cannae be arsed reading through the earlier pages, but Gannon's comments on the official site seem to suggest the switch at half-time was purely tactical. It cost us two points today. I can't understand why the hell changes would be made at half-time. There are no explanations whatsoever, assuming it wasn't caused by injury. The short pass from Ruddy to Hateley that we seem to try and do every game is also absolutely suicidal and I can't believe it made another appearance today. But overall, not too unhappy with the point. Still only one defeat this season, but if we'd turned some draws into wins this year we'd be absolutely flying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonesy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 since the st johnstone game gannon has been guilty of thinking he can effect the outcome of a game from the sideline. we turned things round in perth but gannon in the papers creditied it to the fact craigan and sutton were subbed off when it was clearly because of the change to 4-5-1 to 4-4-2. Who made the change from 451 to 442 in Perth then? has anyone ever seen a manger so keen to make personnel or tactical changes before the second half starts? i watch a lot of football and i can't think of any other manager who is similar. Mourinho is never scared to make early changes and has learned to make it work for him. Not comparing Gannon to him, just giving a name. Plus people have been moaning for years the Butcher or Malpas or McGhee or McLeish or Davies always seemed reluctant to make changes and always left it until there was 10 or 20 minutes left before making changes. Now theres a guy there willing to take the chance, and now people are moaning about what they've been looking for for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Plus people have been moaning for years the Butcher or Malpas or McGhee or McLeish or Davies always seemed reluctant to make changes and always left it until there was 10 or 20 minutes left before making changes. Now theres a guy there willing to take the chance, and now people are moaning about what they've been looking for for years. The main difference is though that guys like Butcher and Malpas took absolutely ages to make changes when the whole ground could see they were needed, whereas Gannon seems to want to make changes when the whole ground can see there's absolutely no need for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Like everything, I think it's hard to find a happy medium. With McGhee we were used to him bring on Lasley for McGarry in 86 mins, or Murphy for Darren Smith in 78 mins, etc. I am definitely happier with the way Gannon does things, and as I said previously, all his gambles have worked up until the last two games, where I feel they've really cost us. I've always believed in "if it ain't broke don't fix it", Gannon seems to pick up on any slight fault, whereas McGhee and those before him seem to wait till things were beyond repair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Who made the change from 451 to 442 in Perth then? Mourinho is never scared to make early changes and has learned to make it work for him. Not comparing Gannon to him, just giving a name. Plus people have been moaning for years the Butcher or Malpas or McGhee or McLeish or Davies always seemed reluctant to make changes and always left it until there was 10 or 20 minutes left before making changes. Now theres a guy there willing to take the chance, and now people are moaning about what they've been looking for for years. 1. it was the fact that in every interview gannon stated that the change in our fortunes was due the change in personnel completely ignoring that it was due to the change in formation. the guy is always happy to take credit for any success in the media but never puts any blame on himself. 2. show me another manager who has changed their team before the kickoff of the second half 58% of the time in league matches this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Cannae be arsed reading through the earlier pages, but Gannon's comments on the official site seem to suggest the switch at half-time was purely tactical. It cost us two points today. I can't understand why the hell changes would be made at half-time. There are no explanations whatsoever, assuming it wasn't caused by injury. The short pass from Ruddy to Hateley that we seem to try and do every game is also absolutely suicidal and I can't believe it made another appearance today. But overall, not too unhappy with the point. Still only one defeat this season, but if we'd turned some draws into wins this year we'd be absolutely flying. This. I can't believe this doesn't get a LOT more comment. It has to stop. Now. By the look of things Ruddy DOESN'T want to do it but has been instructed too. If we keep playing a short pass to a defender or Hateley, just outside the box when they are then in possession facing their own goal and with a striker or two charging them down, we will concede a goal sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 since the st johnstone game gannon has been guilty of thinking he can effect the outcome of a game from the sideline. Guilty??? Isn't that his bloody job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Guilty??? Isn't that his bloody job? he seems to believe that he can have more effect than is possible. i watch a lot of footballl, international, european, premier league and domestic and i've never seen a boss so keen to micromanage. the last two games we've been well on top but he's switched things around which has ended up hurting us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finlay Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 he seems to believe that he can have more effect than is possible. i watch a lot of footballl, international, european, premier league and domestic and i've never seen a boss so keen to micromanage. the last two games we've been well on top but he's switched things around which has ended up hurting us. Although not perfect, ultimately we didn't lose any of those two games. No manager is going to get every decision correct. I still remember the stark terror of preseason. I think we are in a much better position than any of us would have imagined. One loss in twelve? Fifth in the table? Above the team McGhee left us for by (at this time) two games worth of points? Yes, please. We could very easily be where Falkirk and Killie are right now. 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.