RicoS321

Thon VAR decision against the Tim has - hilariously - taken shite refereeing to a whole new level. I think I'd have asked the players to walk off. Brilliant.

Aye, that was a good performance tonight. They were a very good team, they'd wipe the floor with the Tims. Some of the stuff they played was top class, and their pressing and movement was exceptional, we barely got a second on the ball. Bit harsh to blame anyone for second and third goals, the cross for the second was sublime, and the entire move for the third was top class. I didn't get a great view of the first, but looked a decent finish too. Milne, Devlin and Lazetic absolute stand outs as everyone has mentioned. Milne looks as good as McKenna was, but probably better on the ball, and just as quick. Devlin is just ace, and there's no chance on earth that Jensen would have been there to score that header, and if he had, he'd have been second to the ball too. The shoulder barge to win the one-on-one was just class too, although I suspect some of you think that shoulder barges should be a foul..... Clarkson wasn't great, in a very unfamiliar role, Palaversa was average too, and Armstrong didn't get himself involved enough. The three replacements far outperformed them. The booing was pathetic, I'm not quite sure what Nilsen has done to deserve it, and he played well tonight. Keskinen worked hard, but his decision making was poor, but a few more weeks with Karlsson and against poorer opposition and we could have something. Mitov was okay, the conditions were difficult for a keeper, especially down the RDS end, where the wind was blowing the ball about a lot, even on the ground when kicking. Will be interesting to see how we use the squad for Sunday. There were a lot of tired legs out there at the end. I could see justification for Jensen ahead of Devlin in that regard.

Jane Goodall too. Sad day for the chimp world.

No, I don't recall anything being mentioned. I'm wondering if there was an inkling within the coaching staff that it might be the case, and that is why we got Dorrington back? Anyway, I'm assuming Knoester is fit after his early subbing? Molloy and Polvara as backup centre backs is absolutely fine to be honest. Milne will get a good full season too, which is good.

Latvian Mikey Devlin

Is that all one sentence in morphine-land?

Ah, that explains why Devlin got a chance at the weekend.

Goalies take ages to develop, and then last forever. We'll no doubt have a rake of them in five years time. Scott Bain probably the best performing Scottish keeper just now. Archie Mair throwing them in for Morecambe these days.

Young goalie returns for Scotland

Although the fact that none are very good is probably not helping matters. I don't think it's just Thelin who doesn't have a clue what the least shite option is. The negligent part is having three well over the age of thirty, who aren't managing ninety minutes really, especially when Palaversa can't either.

He was responding to the point where you suggested Thelin was inept, and giving examples to show otherwise. We haven't progressed, nobody is suggesting that, just that it might not be down to ineptitude. Similarly, the massive financial advantage isn't necessarily of benefit to the manager though. Nor a source of criticism either. How that budget is being spent is of far greater concern to me than the current performances for example. Of our new signings, none really look capable of coming into the current team and performing well (maybe Armstrong, and probably Karlsson?). Milanovic, Aouchiche, Nisbet, Gyamfi, Yengi, Lazetic, Bilalovic (the last two maybe have something) all look like distinctly average players that would need a lot of work. They're toiling a bit, through lack of confidence, but I haven't looked at any of the summer signings and thought we'd signed a player. They all look like squad filler players who might have a good run at some point, but we'd likely be trying to offload next summer, or shortly thereafter. For me, the biggest issues surround recruitment and squad building. We've got old players and young players, with little in-between. Project players and more project players. Zero balance. That is a hindrance on any budget. That is on the club, not the manager. Or at least it should be.

I'm trying to remember, there was something we did, but it escapes me. It's not about whether the manager can cut it or not, it's about creating the conditions in which they can do the best possible job. Frustratingly, everyone seems to equate that with "amount of money given in a transfer window", which means we'll be in this situation again in 12-18 months.

I totally agree. The most frustrating thing is that we could have said this about all of our managers since McInnes left. I just don't get all the "the manager has been backed" crap to be honest, it doesn't make any sense. Backing doesn't come in the form of money, it comes in the form of time (well, both, but I think you get what I mean!). If we're having to overhaul our squad every year, then it's inconceivable that we should also be replacing the manager every year too. Every manager is going to have a season where at least half of the recruits aren't up to it. If that's on top of having a limited squad already, then time can be the only solution. I think our back line mostly had the workings of a decent set of options, with two players in each role that would work (when we inexplicably decided to bring back Dorrington and not ship out Molloy - do one or the other), left back aside. In the midfield, we were going into this season on a hiding to nothing, with Clarkson probably the only player going through a period of improvement, and several players going into regression, or just maybe not being good enough at all (perhaps Palaversa and Polvara). Similarly, the forward line really only had Keskinen as a young player that you might think would kick on. What we're seeing, then, is absolutely inevitable. If you factor in the 50% of signings that turn out to be gash, and the near zero players in the building that would mitigate that, we were always going to be a poorer side than last year without a huge slice of luck. To date, it seems that we haven't got that luck. How much of that do you apportion to the manager? Well, it seems like a huge portion, because it appears that we've handed Thelin the keys to the club in lieu of us making the right hires, whilst simultaneously forcing him to play entertaining football and have a single "identity", which we saw failing in Robson, Goodwin and Glass in prior years. So he'll get the full blame, and the sack, inevitably. But who is actually at fault here? It's no coincidence that every manager since McInnes (and even McInnes with his 3-4-3 in the final season) has adopted a "style", which they've persevered with to near the bitter end (Robson still playing like Ramadani was there, months after he'd left? Goodwin playing Ramadani as a holding midfielder for months despite him being terrible at it? Glass passing his way into trouble in an attempt to entertain?), changing it up in the final few games when the writing was on the wall. This is being forced upon managers by the "strategy". They must adopt a playing style, and must implement it up until the point they get sacked because it doesn't actually work. No room for pragmatism. No room for adapting to the actual players in the building. All the while, getting no backing from an experienced tecnical/football director, who can question their decisions, make sure the correct balance of player is coming through the door, and act as a buffer between manager and chairman to ensure that we divert to pragmatism when things don't go to plan in the transfer window. We'll never manage to spend our way to success. Our budget is nowhere near high enough to implement a style, because if we get two or three signings wrong, we're down to a level of budget of a Motherwell or St Mirren if they get things right. We have to allow the manager time to be pragmatic, and see if he can adopt that and get himself out of the hole that the club has allowed him to dig for himself.

You're right. It gets harder and harder for players to shoulder charge since they had to slice off their unnatural arms a few years back.

The worrying thing is that I don't think you're right. Aouchiche looks exactly like what I was expecting from his YouTube clips. A nice footballer who flatters to deceive. Works hard whilst not actually working hard - in other words, he does all the easy stuff quite well, but never actually does anything. A nothing footballer. He excels at controlling the ball, dropping a shoulder, tracking a man, but he's not great at the incisive early pass, driving with the ball or tackling/intercepting. To the extent that we've already seen him play deeper on a few occasions, where he seems a little bit happier, but where we absolutely do not need another player of that type. He's one of these guys that will trick you into thinking he's good, but he's very easy to play against. I think a scout should have been picking up in it. In terms of Palaversa, he works his arse off, he just doesn't appear to be able to play more than an hour. He looks absolutely fucked, and it wasn't a surprise to see him flailing around like a gype for their first goal because he was so knackered. He's a 25 year old still playing like a 19 year old. He could be really good otherwise, but I think we're going to have to give up on him at his age. The biggest issue is that it should have been clear that was the case in the summer and we should have been going all out to get a box to box midfielder. Edit: it's like Palaversa is playing with an injury, or long COVID or something, it's the only way to describe it.