RicoS321

It's a good throw of the dice like, but that's exactly what it is. After tonight's game, Twitter will either be going nuts because we've signed a couple of donkeys rather than give Anderson another six goes at it, or they'll be booking their flights to the champion's league draw. I think Hendry will be a useful Main replacement that might get us something late in games, I think Hornby will take several games to get up for it and Kamberi will do fuck all before scoring a spectacular thirty yarder against the Hun to send us to the Scottish cup final (which we lose to st Johnstone).

We need to ruin at least one young player's future by making him sit on our bench for six months instead of giving him an opportunity to play every week on loan.

Is anyone going to check on Hernandez? Hope he's okay. I feel like he's done remarkably well out of all this. He's basically been so shite, that he doesn't even make it on to the really shite players list to get abused. I mean Main actually attended games with his shiteness, he should really have considered just fucking off to South America and he wouldn't have got any abuse for being shite.

I'm guessing Kamberi might be seen as a creative option in place of Wright. Exciting window for sure. Hornby not as good as Cosgrove, Kamberi not as good as Wright, Hendry a dirty horse.... But we got rid of Curtis fucking Main. I'm going to get shitfaced.

Main out on loan. It was on the rumour mill somewhere, but I've lost it now. Be ace if true. Not quite sure we need 4 strikers competing for 1 position, although I'm guessing that he'll play Kamberi around about the Wright shaped hole (with fewer requirements in back-tracking) if signed.

Three in, three out (including Cosgrove) according to the rumour mill. That's more changes than McInnes has made subs this season.

Did they not change the rules to three for Covid?

Good move for Anderson, I hope he does well for himself. Kamberi is another that would be fine on loan when there's no fans to boo the hun cunt.

I don't disagree with a lot of that, I'm just struggling to see what it's got to do with a style. I think you've thrown a bunch of other stuff in the mix that has nothing to do with style. Over an eight year period, I don't think you can have a consistent style. With our turnover of players, and the varying degree of quality of our signings, it would be impossible. McInnes has generally been good, eventually, each year of finding a setup that gets results and going on a good run of point building to maintain a strong league position. Unless we get a striker in the next few days, I don't think he'll manage that this year. The setup with Watkins was enough to win us games. He needs to pick a setup this week and stick with it or we'll be heavily relying on luck.

Whilst in this instance, it might be, I would agree. I saw them play twice, and both times they had a static poacher playing alongside Anderson. It was completely the wrong setup for him. His all round play in those games was fine. His next step needs to be the championship somewhere, maybe Raith. If he gets a few goals then he might turn out to be fine. Would I rather see him than Main on the pitch? Absolutely, but not for three minutes every fortnight.

The teams you're talking about take their style (or what they like to tell people is their style) from the club, not the manager. It transcends the manager. If the dons want to do that, that's fine. Ferguson's team "had a chip on the shoulder attitude"? That's not a style. Most of the styles you mention aren't styles either, they're really just tactics. Most teams in the league would disagree we're a bit soft too, we're fairly dominant in games and quite physical. Hoban, Taylor, Considine, Ferguson, McRorie, Leigh, Cosgrove are not shy in the physical side of the game. Yes, we're brilliant at closing out victories, that's just a demonstrable fact. I don't think we've lost a game this year where we've been ahead but I'd have to check. We rarely lose leads. Game management, as you say, being the style, which is the question you asked. Grim at times, but we've taken a lot of points on the back of it. You say it's negative, I say its pragmatic. When he buys shite players, he shitefests the games to make up for it, grinding out points that previous managers - and other SPFL managers (Lennon at Hibs a prime example) - would not have. To have won so many games with a loser's mentality is fairly spectacular. Point of order: there was no financial fuckedness with utd or hibs, they just had managers that got them relegated by being shite. That was their "success".

That wasn't my argument. I agreed that Anderson wasn't good enough. You said that he showed today that he was garbage whereas I think today showed a player being poorly managed by being given a five minute cameo and being hung out to dry when he missed. The point being that if McInnes doesn't believe in Anderson, he just shouldn't play him. If he thinks he might still offer something then give him 25 minutes.

Exactly. So less to do with ability and more to do with the five minute cameo.

No it doesn't say a lot. What style did fergie have? The winning one. If McInnes had a single style in 8 years, we'd have been worked out by every other team. Our points totals always suggest otherwise. Strange you mention disciplined, I'd say we're extremely disciplined to a man. We're brilliant at closing out victories and we rarely hear of any off field misdemeanour (a sober Soul visit the pinnacle for these boring cunts). Professionalism is a definite plus factor. We're night and day as a club since pre-McInnes, when we were just a shoddy mess. McInnes' flaws are generally tactical and in player recruitment. They've been done to death.

I don't think today showed that at all, it showed that regularly giving people only five minutes in the park is unlikely to yeild a good return. Anderson has proved before now that he likely won't make it, but the answer is either not to play him at all, or give him an actual opportunity. Anderson has proven on many occasions that his finishing is excellent, its his all round play that is pish, but giving people a longer warm up than you do minutes on the park will always lead to a player lacking in confidence that will snatch at opportunities. That was an opportunity well within Anderson's abilities today.

Yep, I've liked Goodwin since I heard him interviewed there, he was very determined and very articulate and very knowledgeable. Although it's fairly unlikely that a St Mirren manager coming to the dons would be any good.

I think Goodwin would be a great appointment. I'm not sure we're anymore ready to appoint a new manager than we were last week.

He had a good post top six that season and the change in system with him up front was likely the reason we finished second ahead of the hun, so it was probably a good decision at the time.

Is that really a missed opportunity? Team on a 12 game unbeaten run with a full strength team, versus a dons team with no striker?

Hoban and Ash were excellent, Considine also. McRorie all blood and thunder, but very little quality.

Oh well, not the worst result all things considered. Feel a bit sorry for Anderson, gets three minutes of a game and his first touch is a sitter missed. Not any worse than Kennedy's effort. Both shite. 79th minute to make the first sub, I've no idea what McInnes is seeing out there. We weren't scoring. Whilst it was a shite effort from Anderson, I've no doubt that the lack of time on the pitch is a major factor in those chances. Give him 25 minutes and he might get two or three chances, or at least two or three touches of the ball, before he gets that opportunity. Throwing a guy on with such little time and it's always going to be 100mph shite, and snatching at opportunities. It was obvious from the hour mark that we needed a change.

Even if we did, this pitch is a little faster than normal I'd say, both teams making errors when it gets tight in the final third.

Tactics min. I sort of understand it in this game because McLennan probably isn't winning that many headers from direct crosses, he needs to make space, and maybe the wide players checking back allows this. To be honest, it makes sense on a pitch like this because the option to cut inside and shoot on a slick pitch should be fruitful. But I'm probably in agreement with you, I'd rather we had width and look to play quick first time balls in the area before McLennan is under pressure. Otherwise, a decent half, very even game, good and open and plenty of pressing. Need to start shooting more and trying the quick pass for McLennan in behind.

Either game off, or 0-2 (Hendry 2)

Jesus. I mean, I wouldn't wish for covid infection rates to soar, cancelling the season, but...