Jump to content
 
 
 
 

Big Jaws

Site Contributors
  • Content Count

    1,252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Big Jaws last won the day on December 23 2018

Big Jaws had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

485 Excellent

About Big Jaws

  • Rank
    Reserve Player

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No mate it wasn't. We're on the attack its played back to Flanagan and when the ball breaks Goldson is the one who steps up and is caught with acres of space in behind him. As I said Eduard to Ncham, Eduard runs around Goldson and gets it back from Ncham. Now Katic has to cover across and cuts off the inside run and possible pass to a runner forcing Eduard to go wide onto his left but Eduard cleverly plays it with the outside of his right boot to go past Katic on his outside. Katic adjusting to that at full pace looks pretty clumsy. Over those 5 yards Eduard had the turn of pace to go past Katic. IMO we're fortunate that Katic got a little on him during the exchange because it slowed him down and forced him wide enough not to shoot himself, its on his weaker foot and has to play the final ball again with the outside of his right boot, and for us to get bodies in the box to defend the second ball after Wes saves from Burke. If you're looking to blame anyone then John Flanagan for losing the ball and not tracking Burke and Connor Goldson for committing himself inside their half is where you should be looking.
  2. I agree with you that Katic isnt there yet and that he still has some learning to go through yet. However He's not responsible nor was he in the wrong position. The ball is charged down by Burke from Flanagan and breaks into Eduard in the centre circle. Goldson is drawn to the ball and gets caught between Ncham and Eduard who lays it off to Ncham who plays a ball over the top of Goldson back to Eduard. Goldson is towing a caravan well beaten for pace and 2-3 yards off it. Katic has to make up 50 yards because Flanagan doesn't track Burkes run and Katic, is where he should be, covering Burke. Once he realises the ball isn't going over his left shoulder to Burk he tracks 50 yards across the park to then cover Goldson. Eduard beats him in the turn and puts it across the box for Burke. Keeper saves, knocks it out Sinclair picks it up and Goldson clears. Goldson going absolutely mental at Flanagan after he heads it clear tells you all you need to know about that whole passage of play. Not that Goldson wasn't partly to blame but you get the gist.
  3. I really should let Steve mention this. When Willy trapped after the youth game we were already two hours into the recording with nearly 90+ mins of material to work with. Steve made his first podcast executive decision to cut the piece and reschedule it. Personally I'm looking forwards to hearing what Willy has to say.
  4. I do understand what you are saying. Kent is all over the place and more often than not IMO is in the wrong place to where he should be from the shape the team is supposed to be. Anyway I'm done for the night thats skunnered me.
  5. McCrorie might have been a better option than Jack at the moment, I feel Jack is carrying a knock, but thats not the type of player that Kamara is Pete he's a sitting mid. Both Kamara and Jack together are the types of players you want when you play in Europe or against Celtic but not against Aberdeen, Hibs or Kilmarnock at home mate. At home you'll have 60% of the ball in attacking positions and two sitting mids in those games is one too many. We dont seem to be able to play with our wide men narrow sitting inside their full backs in the channel.
  6. I understand that but Kent and Candeias arent playing as midfielders in that set up. They start wide and stay wide. if they were playing in the way you seem to be suggesting they should then they would be much tighter to Arfield breaking out to the wings. We'd get far more quality crosses into the box and they also contribute more goals too. We play with one AM and two wingers.
  7. I agree with you but we dont play with three attacking midfielders we play with one. Jack and Kamara are never going to be running through the lines finding space to receive the ball they are sitting mids. The only player we have that can do that is Arfield and its farting agaisnt thunder expecting him to do it, on his own, up against a packed defence/midfield.
  8. Funny you should say that Frankie as Aberdeen played with 5 in midfield and were particularly effective in breaking up play and condensing the space in the first half. So not really conceding the midfield at all is it? My opinion is that going with the two defensive type midfielders Jack, Kamara and one attacking midfielder in Scott Arfield at the head of the triangle is never going to return the type of play we require to break teams like Aberdeen down when they come to Ibrox as their game plan is to stack midfield and defence defend deep and hit on the counter. If SG is going to persist with the 4-3-3 in its many guises then he needs another quality attacking midfielder in there along with Arfield. Our two wide players were particularly poor tonight. Candeias final ball was astonishing for most of the game and Kent did as he has done most of the season, other than the odd game here and there, which is run across the field from left to right and vice versa and lose control of the ball eventually. All it takes for that to happen as a defender/ midfielder is a little nudge on him or get a little nick on the ball. Its not new stuff I'm saying here as you guys have heard me say it often when we're recording pods. We're far too predictable with a single game plan that more often than not doesn't succeed against these types of teams because we simply dont have the quality.
  9. We should be at least 2-3 up here if not for some last ditch defending from Hibs. And what can you say about the absolute spunk trumpet having a go at James Tavernier? At no point were the stewards in control of that situation not even after the initial incident absolutely disgraceful behaviour.
  10. UB representative Ross McGill interview on Heart and Hand with Cammy Bell.
  11. The truth is I don't agree with their politics either @Bluedell but I'll defend their right to have a political opinion regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Its a situation I have previous in. In my final year of Uni 92' I canvassed the University senate into hearing debate against SLAB Murphy position. He had just taken over as the president of the SNUS and had dictatorially refused to affiliate the RCP now RCS (revolutionary communist society). Incidentally theirs was and still is a political opinion I do not agree with. My position was that its not Murphy or new labours job to decide what political discourse undergraduates are entitled to read or discuss and I'll be damned if I'd allow him or his party to dictate to us what is. Other than the RCS president I was the only speaker. The senate agreed with my position and had them affiliated. It seems to me that the UB hold political views that some are are uncomfortable with hence their stance on them however there are others within the Rangers support who simply see them as an annoyance. Neither of these positions sit well with me.
  12. You're entitled to your opinion but as has been said already I find the political reaction to their fliers far more sinister. Its clear that the targeting of them by various politicians is why they've felt the need to cover up while marching to the stadium. From the arguments I've seen you make on these very boards playing with emotive language and argument is beneath you.
  13. As far as I'm aware the UB are a very visible and public group and not as you seem to be implying a proscribed organisation. I don't recall their name being attached or involved in crowd disturbance or violence. They stand in the same place every home game unmasked if you want to look at their fizzogs. If I were a young man and inclined to march in protest and/or political action I too would cover up my face and any other easily identifiable markings. When these UB cant go to the football together because they are monitored, filmed and photographed at every opportunity all done under the guise of security intelligence gathering when they've done very little of a threatening nature towards well anyone really other than write a couple of poorly worded fliers. When we take into account the modern fascination with facial recognition and the propensity of authorities to photograph and film its population at will, which I find far more invasive and sinister, then I have some sympathy. You're speaking to the wrong person if you think that you can find parity with me via that line. I'm still of the mindset that it is my, your and everyone elses right to anonymity and to go about our business without interruption or having to identify ourselves even when marching to a football stadium.
  14. You may not feel/think you are but you are marginalising them. As I said in my post I've no skin in the game as far as safe standing goes but in saying that there is a further rub in your post in that for example I no longer hold a season book but when I did there was nothing and I mean absolutely nothing that lead me to believe that I was entitled to keep the same seat over multiple seasons.
  15. That rules out the point I was making about being disingenuous if this has always been known to those involved.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.