stewarty

The formation debate is interesting. For me, some experimentation is okay within certain limits. For example, if we are working on things in training, I see no reason why we should not change shape during the game to give teams different problems. Too often we have allowed teams to settle into a rhythm when defending against us, and we have been limited in terms of giving them different problems to contend with. Whether tonight is the right game to play the diamond, I would question. We played our best game of the season vs Celtic using the 4-3-3/ 4-2-3-1, with the crucial difference being our motivation and determination to consistently press high. So that would be my preference again. But should we struggle for a goal or if they settle into a defensive rhythm, by all means switch to some of our other tactical options depending on what Aberdeen themselves are doing. The more the team get used to this flexibility, hopefully the easier it is to put into effect.

I thought there were promising signs with regards to Defoe and Morelos. The first penalty was from Alfy's cut back, and it was Defoe's sharpness that got him quickly to the ball and his quick feet inducing the tackle that won the penalty. Alfy worked his man and the space the whole game as we have become accustomed to. And there were other signs that Defoe was starting to get more involved in the play and find space. As I say, promising signs. Lets see what they can do against a much better team on Wednesday .

The only thing that makes me doubt my opinion on this is that Michael Stewart agrees. No penalty and no yellow for simulation was his take. I'm on the look out for horsemen of the apocalypse...

Defoe doesn't even claim for the second one. He is clearly playing for contact, but gets straight back up when it doesnt happen. It was a bad call, make no mistake. But if Clarke is somehow suggesting that Defoe should get a ban... that would be ridiculous.

Don't make me start inventing stats again

The problem with that is that Morelos seems to prefer operating as lone striker with wide support. Any time he's had a strike partner he has been much less effective. One for the manager and technical coaching staff to work on.

Oh for god sake I've already been through both threads end to end twice, I'm not doing it again.

In the interests of fairness, @buster. You had 8 out of 23 total posts in the Killie thread prior to/ during the game. And for the Livi game it was 10 out of 13. So by the same bullshit invented metric, your ratio is 5:1, which suggests a propensity to the negative as well

You can make stats to suggest anything. To illustrate that point, 7 out of Craig's 11 posts (up the point earlier), were from before/during the game. For the Killie thread, he made 5 posts before/ during the game, out of the 40 total. Make up your own conclusions from there. But that would perhaps make the ratio closer to 9:1 in terms of posts after the game, once the outcome was known. Seems a bit OTT to me

To underline the point: Your posts in this thread so far: 11 Your posts on the Killie thread: 40 Yes, I was said enough to count. ?

I can only imagine this is a signing that is viewed as short term back up, with lad having potential to have sell-on value. Like flipping a house. Even then I think I would still prefer to see our existing young keepers get exposure as backup if needed.

Agreed. Easily dismissed drivel.

Bugger!

29 for me. 9 wins, two draws and a defeat.

Totally agree. It can be an overwhelming amount of content so its very good value for money if you want to supplement your regular GN pod diet.

Seems he got married too - which perhaps explains the extra time off.

I think the key element is also that in cricket, the decision is only overturned on appeal in the event that the video umpire can see sufficient evidence that the on-field umpire made the wrong call. perversely, this has in turn helped to improve the quality of umpiring over the years as the umpires are able to quickly review contentious decisions and learn from their mistakes. Cricket does however have additional technology to help refine those areas further - e.g. the decision review system that uses hawkeye, heat maps, sensitive microphones, etc to detect contact between bat and ball

in Cricket they have a video umpire independently reviews the passage of play that is in question, and relays back to the on field umpire whether their original decision is correct, or should be overturned. That works in relation to decisions taken by the umpire only where one of the teams appeals a decision. For all other judgement calls, its down to the video umpire judges based on the tools available.

£7m seems a bit light to me though, given he's contracted till 2022. Saying that, if the numbers get to the likes of £10m+ I suspect that might be the trigger point.

I heard about a minute of some argument between Macleod and Burns and the gist of it was conjecture from them both, with Macleod pointing out that Brown is younger than Defoe and Davis (though only by 6 months re: Davis), therefore it was ridiculous to assert that Brown was past it when Defoe and Davis were being lauded as great signings. I think there is merit in both stances, but as ever we will need to wait till our new signings play a few games before we can judge the impact they will have vs the apparently fading Broonaldinho

In the interests of balance, in terms of the building narrative around the quality of refereeing; we should also highlight our own club's stance in calling out Collum's poor performance, as well as the suggestion after the first game of the season from Gerrard about decisions going against us. Levein, Lennon, McInnes et al, have all made their own comments. That said, my own take here is that the primary issue that enables all of these spats to build, and for pressure to continue to build on referees, is the fundamental flaws in the SFA's compliance process. Rather than build confidence in the application of the laws of the game, it fundamentally undermines them. As @Rick Roberts points out, unless every game is reviewed for potential compliance incidents in full and without favour to any media agenda, then there will always be decisions that go unpunished which will aggrieve one or both sides. But where do we go from here? Is the answer VAR so that the referee can check individual decisions during the games so that there is minimal need for the overlapping compliance officer review? Possibly, but are all clubs and the SFA willing to pay for it when there is little hard cash around? And what then happens when interpretations of VAR incidents also generate their own contentious levels of debate?

Exposing the hypocrisy of McInnes and the SFA in one presser, with charges racking up....Got to love Levein's "no fucks left to give" attitude.

Its interesting that the SFA rules refer to acting in the utmost good faith. Fair enough, but how does that explain Collum's obvious attempt to explain his errors? I'm afraid it just doesn't wash.

The interesting element to this is not whether the SFA felt compelled to follow their rules - for we did make statements that breached said rules; but whether there is actually any meaningful change in terms of the SFA's relationship with clubs with regards to the standards of refereeing. If there is a manager in the Premiership who hasn't complained at some point, I'd be surprised. But when you have so many game changing moments that officials either plainly get wrong, deliberately or otherwise, the system needs to be be reviewed. I wont hold my breath though.

Interesting... wouldn't surprise me if clubs were in for Tav given previous rumours. Is there more substance this time round?