Forrester Misses Cup Semi

[barca72 440]

This game will be won in midfield and we are restricted in our options..

We need tackling and distribution. We are light in our options with Shiels, Law and Zalelem ruled out as starters as being too lightweight.

I would expect them to start Lustig and Kierney as full backs and Brown, Bitton and Commons in midfield. The full backs give them pace on the overlap and Brown and Bitton give them hard tackling and distribution in midfield. Commons provides the guile and the diving.

A lot of the time where we have conceded goals this season our full backs have been on the overlap and Kiernan and Wilson are pulled out of position to cover. We can't have that with Griffiths and Roberts around.

I would start Ball at right back, and keep him back with the CBs, with Tavernier in midfield. This alone would give us more solid tackling in midfield, and push going forward.

Clark with Tavernier on the right would keep Sviatchenko and Tierney honest while Miller, McKay and Wallace keep Boyata and Lustig occupied.

Halliday and Holt will have to cover a lot of ground before giving way to Shiels and Law. Waghorn (hopefully) on for the last bit for Miller.

[RANGERRAB 3,340]

This game will be won in midfield and we are restricted in our options..

We need tackling and distribution. We are light in our options with Shiels, Law and Zalelem ruled out as starters as being too lightweight.

I would expect them to start Lustig and Kierney as full backs and Brown, Bitton and Commons in midfield. The full backs give them pace on the overlap and Brown and Bitton give them hard tackling and distribution in midfield. Commons provides the guile and the diving.

A lot of the time where we have conceded goals this season our full backs have been on the overlap and Kiernan and Wilson are pulled out of position to cover. We can't have that with Griffiths and Roberts around.

I would start Ball at right back, and keep him back with the CBs, with Tavernier in midfield. This alone would give us more solid tackling in midfield, and push going forward.

Clark with Tavernier on the right would keep Sviatchenko and Tierney honest while Miller, McKay and Wallace keep Boyata and Lustig occupied.

Halliday and Holt will have to cover a lot of ground before giving way to Shiels and Law. Waghorn (hopefully) on for the last bit for Miller.

 

I really think all we can do is flood the MF ,stop them playing and hope it frustrates them.

Really dont think we can rely on the likes of Clark at all for this fixture.

I think it is starting to hit home how much we need to improve this squad at the end of theseason

[ian1964 10,486]

We will play the same way we have all season,the manager believes in his approach to games so there will be nothing new in the way we approach this game,only the personnel may not be what he would want,ie Waghorn & Forrester.

[pete 2,499]

This game will be won in midfield and we are restricted in our options..

We need tackling and distribution. We are light in our options with Shiels, Law and Zalelem ruled out as starters as being too lightweight.

I would expect them to start Lustig and Kierney as full backs and Brown, Bitton and Commons in midfield. The full backs give them pace on the overlap and Brown and Bitton give them hard tackling and distribution in midfield. Commons provides the guile and the diving.

A lot of the time where we have conceded goals this season our full backs have been on the overlap and Kiernan and Wilson are pulled out of position to cover. We can't have that with Griffiths and Roberts around.

I would start Ball at right back, and keep him back with the CBs, with Tavernier in midfield. This alone would give us more solid tackling in midfield, and push going forward.

Clark with Tavernier on the right would keep Sviatchenko and Tierney honest while Miller, McKay and Wallace keep Boyata and Lustig occupied.

Halliday and Holt will have to cover a lot of ground before giving way to Shiels and Law. Waghorn (hopefully) on for the last bit for Miller.

 

Brown.Bitton and Commons. = BBC:facepalm:

[der Berliner 3,328]

Brown.Bitton and Commons. = BBC:facepalm:

 

Did you note that the SPFL and BBC are at odds about their current deal ...

 

The present deal is worth £1.4 million per year but Topping said the BBC would have to offer between £3 million and £4 million before the 42 clubs would agree to continue.

 

And the SPFL want more money? I actually don't know what I want more, the SPFL get all the shame they are entitled to after 2012, or the BBC get kicked out for selling them this deal.

 

BTW, most of the 42 Scottish clubs, i.e. all those not in the Premiership, already had the time of their lives due to us playing them 4 times a season, if not more.

Edited April 14, 2016 by der Berliner

[craig 5,199]

I would prefer we play our normal game. Even if we lose it gives the management team a decent indication on where and how they need to strengthen next season. Playing different tactics doesn't give that insight. More importantly though, the way we are accustomed to playing this season is still the most likely to provide our best chance of success

[der Berliner 3,328]

It is a bit concerning that we have literally no strengths in depth in certain areas, something which was bound to get us through the Championship, but beyond that (as we see now in the cups)? We would essentially get badly exposed had any of our (only) three centre-halfs had received an injury, followed by one to either or both Tav and Wallace. I actually was a bit concerned when both Forrester and Wallace went off last Sunday. And ... then imagine that we are essentially playing exactly one style of formation throughout the season. Who would be a) adequate cover and b) could fit in straight away at the back despite having had any great amount of game time? As long as there are no injuries and suspension, all is well. And it is obviously no good to have two more CHs and fullbacks in the squad who hardly get a game. Right now we can all but hope that we'll get through this game mostly unharmed, as we will have next to no real cover (bar utility people) on Sunday for the back four/five. Which is obviously something the Scum is acutely aware of.

 

Not that I am panicking, it is just a few concerns that happen unto your mind when you see the squad on the field and the bench. Crooks will come in handy, of course. But we will most likely loose Ball and sure need some more players who can play CH and fullback. Which will sure be on the menue list for summer ...

Edited April 15, 2016 by der Berliner

[Rousseau 9,605]

I disagree that the squad is too lightweight. Yes, we're missing two players and we're now struggling to find replacements. But add the ineligible M'OH and King to that and we're missing 4 players. In an ordinary run-of-the-mill season (with no ineligibles), then we're quite comfortable losing two players. It's a perfect storm situation: 4 players ruled out through for several reasons, and all in the same third of the pitch.

 

On the too lightweight issue (player-wise): I don't think it's necessarily a big problem, because if Zelalem et al -- I don't think for a second that Zelalem is starting -- can shift the ball quickly, then Brown will be bursting a gut to catch F-all, and he'll not get a sniff -- If we play it right. I don't believe the 'too lightweight' argument is entirely credible in a modern game. A player can barely tackle anymore without getting booked for it. A more technical player, with good passing ability, should be more than enough for their dated antics. That doesn't mean a 'destroyer'-type player wouldn't be useful in this game, or in general, because it would; but, we have what we have.

 

I've swung back and forth, from quiet optimism that we can beat them, to outright dread that we're going to get a mauling. As always, the truth will be somewhere in between. I'm not as worried as the last time. We certainly have something to offer, with players and a style that can cause them difficulty. The unknown variable is the 'derby' aspect, because form goes out the window, and anything can happen. I'm looking forward to it though.

Edited April 15, 2016 by Rousseau

[ian1964 10,486]

[craig 5,199]

I disagree that the squad is too lightweight. Yes, we're missing two players and we're now struggling to find replacements. But add the ineligible M'OH and King to that and we're missing 4 players. In an ordinary run-of-the-mill season (with no ineligibles), then we're quite comfortable losing two players. It's a perfect storm situation: 4 players ruled out through for several reasons, and all in the same third of the pitch.

 

On the too lightweight issue (player-wise): I don't think it's necessarily a big problem, because if Zelalem et al -- I don't think for a second that Zelalem is starting -- can shift the ball quickly, then Brown will be bursting a gut to catch F-all, and he'll not get a sniff -- If we play it right. I don't believe the 'too lightweight' argument is entirely credible in a modern game. A player can barely tackle anymore without getting booked for it. A more technical player, with good passing ability, should be more than enough for their dated antics. That doesn't mean a 'destroyer'-type player wouldn't be useful in this game, or in general, because it would; but, we have what we have.

 

I've swung back and forth, from quiet optimism that we can beat them, to outright dread that we're going to get a mauling. As always, the truth will be somewhere in between. I'm not as worried as the last time. We certainly have something to offer, with players and a style that can cause them difficulty. The unknown variable is the 'derby' aspect, because form goes out the window, and anything can happen. I'm looking forward to it though.

 

Cant agree with that Rousseau.

 

If we are looking at whether or not we are lightweight you cant just look at one or two areas of the pitch. Yes, I agree regarding the forward positions with MOH, King, Forrester and Waghorn out (However, remember that King is a loanee).

 

However, if we had lost one of Wallace, Tavernier, Kiernan, Wilson then we would be struggling not only for cover but also for formation and tactics. The only real replacement for ANY of those players would be Ball, and he surely is a shoe-in to sit in front of the back 4. Not only that but he wouldn't be a suitable replacement for either Wallace or Tavernier as he is a very different type of player.

 

If we lost Wallace we have no suitable replacement. Yes, we used Halliday when Wallace went off last weekend but a left back Halliday certainly isn't. The other side our "replacement" for Tavernier was Aird which clearly isn't a strong enough replacement and someone who ended up on loan.

 

I constantly swing back and forth in OF week. I would have felt far more confident in the event that Forrester had made it and I believe Celtic deserve to be favorites. For me though, this one comes down to who wants it more on the day and, unlike last year, we wont lay down meekly to them. I have a suspicion that the 1st goal could be crucial. I don't think any of us are convinced our back line will keep a clean sheet (although they may surprise us) but if we score first it will mean Celtic pushing forward and committing people into attacks, which will leave them vulnerable to counter attack and we have seen this year that we are very effective against teams who play open football against us.

 

If we score first I believe we will win. If they score first I believe we will lose.

 

Obviously I would LOVE to stick it to them - but for me the most important aspect of Sunday's game is that Warburton will get a taste of the OF and see what he will be expected to beat next season. For me, this is all about next season and bringing in the suitable personnel to mount a serious and sustained title challenge.