Dundee Left Chasing Shadows

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Another excellent match anlaysis with which I can agree for the most part especially the role played by Miller which in old money I'd call a deep lying centre forward. He may not be Alfredo di Stefano but he is a lot fitter and whatever pills he is taking I'd like to get some.

 

However, I don't fully understand your phrase "inverted wingers".

 

One small change was that both wingers swapped sides, so they become inverted wingers. Instead of taking their full-backs on the outside, both looked to cut inside. This helped McKay in particular as he was constantly thwarted on the outside during the first-half, but was a real threat in the second-half when he could be a little more unpredictable. Forrester was perhaps less effective as an inverted winger on his own, but his positioning allowed space for Wallace on the outside which worked for the team as a whole; their link-up was almost telepathic, with back-heels and flicked through-balls generally finding each other.

 

Both are right footed players but it seems to me that Forrester is better able to play on the left (witness his link up play with Wallace as you say) than McKay. I agree that McKay was "constantly thwarted on the outside during the first-half" because on the left he continually cuts inside, often linking up well and sometimes putting in shots and scoring occasionally but rarely gets a cross or cut back from the bye line. However, in the second half he was able to get past defenders on the outside and was twice involved in the build up to the second goal (and Forrster made the cross right footed). So rather than "inverted" is the right not his more natural position?

 

That said I think Forrester is best suited to the RMF role he had v Raith.

 

I couldn't figure out replacing McKay (who seemed to me to be giving Dundee constant problems on the right) with Shiels who appeared to be under instructions to play in a wide right role for which he is not obviously well suited and then drifted inside to his more natural midfield position.

 

I also thought it was noticeable that MW waited well beyond his customary 60th minute double substitution as we were well in control of the match and it was really questionable whether any subs were necessary. The only one I might have made would have been to take off Forrester perhaps on the grounds that he is a"luxury" player in order to bottle up the MF with Law or Shiels, though it was hardly necessary as Dundee were a well beaten team by that stage. Perhaps one of the young lads might have got the last 5 or 10 minutes.

Edited March 6, 2016 by BrahimHemdani

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

I know we all have our favourites and also those we do not rate, and it is also well known I dont rate Miller at all. Everyone seems to think he was exceptional yesterday, but for me I didnt see it. I saw him at times stuck in midfield with the game going on around him, his inability to get up with play meaning we were without a striker in the box at times when our wide players were looking to make a pass and he was 40 yards back showing no effort to get forward. I can only say what I noticed from my seat. He made a good contribution overall and I was happy with him yesterday (I dont "want" him to be bad, he is playing for my team!), but I genuinely thought there were 5 or 6 better than him yesterday. Ball, Forrester, Holt, Tav, Wallace, McKay all put in fantastic performances doing what they were in the team to do. Halliday & Miller would be next, with the 3 least worked players, (Wes, Wilson & Kiernan) doing their jobs efficiently if not spectacularly. Perhaps a reflection of a smashing overall team performance.

 

The big question for me is can we reproduce that type of energy, pace and quality when Morton come calling on Friday and shut up shop. We all hope yesterday is the catalyst for some successive good performances and victories in the remaining games and we dont go back (or are forced back by opponents tactics is perhaps more accurate) to a slow-paced, inaccurate probing game.

[Rousseau 9,487]

Another excellent match anlaysis with which I can agree for the most part especially the role played by Miller which in old money I'd call a deep lying centre forward. He may not be Alfredo di Stefano but he is a lot fitter and whatever pills he is taking I'd like to get some.

 

However, I don't fully understand your phrase "inverted wingers".

 

 

 

Both are right footed players but it seems to me that Forrester is better able to play on the left (witness his link up play with Wallace as you say) than McKay. I agree that McKay was "constantly thwarted on the outside during the first-half" because on the left he continually cuts inside, often linking up well and sometimes putting in shots and scoring occasionally but rarely gets a cross or cut back from the bye line. However, in the second half he was able to get past defenders on the outside and was twice involved in the build up to the second goal. So rather than "inverted" is the right not his more natural position?

 

That said I think Forrester is best suited to the RMF role he had v Raith.

 

I couldn't figure out replacing McKay (who seemed to me to be giving Dundee constant problems on the right) with Shiels who appeared to be under instructions to play in a wide right role for which he is not obviously well suited and then drifted inside to his more natural midfield position.

 

I also thought it was noticeable that MW waited well beyond his customary 60th minute double substitution as we were well in control of the match and it was really questionable whether any subs were necessary. The only one I might have made would have been to take off Forrester perhaps on the grounds that he is a"luxury" player in order to bottle up the MF with Law or Shiels, though it was hardly necessary as Dundee were a well beaten team by that stage. Perhaps one of the young lads might have got the last 5 or 10 minutes.

 

Ah, my mistake: I thought McKay was left-footed. Well, then he is an 'inverted winger' before he switched wing; Forrester the opposite. I felt McKay had more success during the second-half, but it must have been just the full-back he was up against. Forrester was better individually in the first-half when he took on his defender, but didn't have the same success in the second-half; his link-up play was better with Wallace though, IMO.

 

The game was won when the subs came on, so I would've liked to have seen the youngsters get game-time. I think we suffered through a lack of width when the subs came on; Clark and Shiels are not natural wide player -- although Clark did OK. I think they got used to it eventually, but the game reverted into an end-to-end game at that stage, with no real control, so we never really seen what they could do.

[Rousseau 9,487]

I know we all have our favourites and also those we do not rate, and it is also well known I dont rate Miller at all. Everyone seems to think he was exceptional yesterday, but for me I didnt see it. I saw him at times stuck in midfield with the game going on around him, his inability to get up with play meaning we were without a striker in the box at times when our wide players were looking to make a pass and he was 40 yards back showing no effort to get forward. I can only say what I noticed from my seat. He made a good contribution overall and I was happy with him yesterday (I dont "want" him to be bad, he is playing for my team!), but I genuinely thought there were 5 or 6 better than him yesterday. Ball, Forrester, Holt, Tav, Wallace, McKay all put in fantastic performances doing what they were in the team to do. Halliday & Miller would be next, with the 3 least worked players, (Wes, Wilson & Kiernan) doing their jobs efficiently if not spectacularly. Perhaps a reflection of a smashing overall team performance.

 

The big question for me is can we reproduce that type of energy, pace and quality when Morton come calling on Friday and shut up shop. We all hope yesterday is the catalyst for some successive good performances and victories in the remaining games and we dont go back (or are forced back by opponents tactics is perhaps more accurate) to a slow-paced, inaccurate probing game.

 

Miller wasn't playing as a striker, so he wasn't going to get into the box etc. As a false-9 his role would be to link-up play, and in this he did a great job: it was because he was playing deeper that the wingers and Holt got in-behind so often. We outnumbered them in central areas because Miller came deep, and the Dundee defenders couldn't really mark him because he was all over the place, dragging them about. When he drops deep, it's up to a central midfielder or winger to push on into the space created, which happened with the 2nd goal -- Holt was on the end of it -- but if Miller is not where he is, then the goal doesn't happen.

 

I don't think you're unreasonable in your criticism and you certainly admit when he does well, but you're perhaps blinded a little to his contribution; I suppose its the opposite with me, seeing things that aren't there at times. The truth lies somewhere in between. I'd rather not rely on a 36 year-old, but he's been very good. I'd like a younger player with his movement!

[MacK1950 2,249]

Don't know where Tannochside was sitting but if he watched miller properly he was linking up play,dragging players out of position and at one stage out sprinted a defender over a 20-30 yard chase for the ball.Maybe you were the guy sitting behind me that declared Miller did not score a goal so how did he get man of the match.

If scoring goals is the measure recent awards should be altered.

[rbr 1,247]

Thought Miller was sensational yesterday and thoroughly warrants his new contract , if he keeps performing and showing the young player the desire he still has for the jersey , that will do for me

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

Copland Rear, fairly central, a great view of the match. You recall one incident where he runs 20-30 yards, I recall one incident where he is merely watching proceedings from 5 yards inside their half while we are playing the ball around at the edge of the box looking for our striker to play it to. I'm not saying he didn't have a good game and played his part, I merely pointed out that in my opinion several players were better yesterday.

 

I have read he had a hand in all 4 goals, which is clearly nonsense as the only contribution he had in the first goal was a misplaced pass straight to a Dundee defender whom Forrester went on to dispossess and score. The third was great dribbling by McKay to earn a FK for Halliday to score, and Law sends Wallace away to score the fourth.

 

I would agree with the notion that he appears to be a better player the further away from goal he plays, citing some good link-up play and pulling defenders out of position for runners to go in behind. The cynic might say that has more to do with his terrible finishing and the less opportunities to flaff his scoring attempts he has, the better his overall contribution appears to be!

[chilledbear 16]

I thought our early goal will have dictated how Dundee played.

[MacK1950 2,249]

The early goal meant Dundee could not park the bus.Regarding playing with a striker yesterday this did not look the plan to me as Miller did not line up as such and his cross to assist Holt in his goal was excellent(a real assist after chest down by MacKay).

Hopefully same again when the game against the manky mob comes.

[colinstein 294]

The early goal meant Dundee could not park the bus.Regarding playing with a striker yesterday this did not look the plan to me as Miller did not line up as such and his cross to assist Holt in his goal was excellent(a real assist after chest down by MacKay).

Hopefully same again when the game against the manky mob comes.

 

I don't think the early goal would have stopped Dundee parking the bus if that had been their plan. They would hope to soak up pressure and get one on the break. Certainly a strategy like that would have been abandoned after our second but I don't think a 10 man defence was ever in their plans