astonishingly (well, maybe not, considering how quiet this place still is), there's been no forensic analysis of the killie game.

 

a quick glance over at afc hat reminded me why i've come back here so sharpish. honestly, i've never seen more idiots in one place since the last time i visited the united states.

 

for what it's worth at this late, late stage: we were absolutely 'king awful for the first half. jc's innovative five at the back was a total shambles. and surely we've seen the last of the enigma that is dan smith. his performance in the first 45 was nothing short of risible - so bad he was even outshone by richie byrne.

 

the midfield was completely non-existant (chiefly as a result of being hellishly outnumbered, i guess) and as a result, neither brew nor mackie got a sniff of the ball.

 

contrary to the lunacy you'll read elsewhere, 70 minutes of craig brewster is better than 90 minutes of any other striker we've got. granted, lovell can feel hard done by after being benched and granted, he looked lively when he came on. but we have no-one at the club with the same footballing ability as brewster, and given the paucity of our play for most of the game, that's an attribute we can't do without.

 

altering the shape in the second half paid much more tangible rewards, and we definitely looked much more comfortable (even if we didn't create a whole lot).

 

mackie looked much better in the second half when he was pushed out wide, and showed great intelligence with the assist for anderson's goal.

 

oh aye, and momo sylla really is honking. some of my tattie howking colleagues used to give the man dog's abuse when he was at the potato dome, which i couldn't understand after seeing some of his performances at st johnstone. but he really is dreadful. his feet don't seem to understand what his brain's telling them to do. astonishing.

 

result from ibrox means it's still on, people (you know what i'm talking about).

 

 

 

 

Not having attended the game it is hard to comment much on how the team performed, but from the radio it seemed like we really missed Hart and Foster - two young players who have had a very decent season in general.

 

From what I gathered, Dan Smiths appearance in a red shirt was very much a mistake as he brings little to the game - a partnership with Richie Byrne on the left side was never going to be a success though. But to Richie's credit he made a good effort of dumping Sylla to the ground as they tussled and made some vital blocks towards the end. In a game where there wasn't really a stand out player for Aberdeen, a back-from-injury Richie held his own.

 

Langfield made on or two vital saves that could have easily led to goals, but he also made one or two flaps that could have easily have led to goals - not inspiring much confidence but he has been part of a defence that has not leaked many goals this season.

 

As for our striking options Brewster is an intelligent and skilful player but he can't last the pace of an entire game - I see him more as an impact player who can come on towards the end to harass a tired defence. The problem is that we didn't do much during the game to tire out the defence!

 

Midfield should carry a lot of the blame for that - they just didn't turn up.

 

 

A smash n' grab as they say, but 3 valuable points nonetheless. I seem to remember a similar game up at ICT last season where we should have been comprehensively beaten but somehow ended up with the points. My hope is that with the missing players returning we will regain a sense of normality on Saturday - we'll need to be at our best to beat a Dundee Utd who lacks ability but will be high on confidence.

Frankly from that what I heard on the radio on saw on the box, it was an utterly dire performance - but given the results we're getting, maybe that's the way forward.

 

Hearts were equally rank yesterday and also won.

 

The lack of midfield is a worry............now we've three games at home, time to wrap up Europe in style and hopefully force a last day showdown with the buns.

The first half for me was entirely explained by the formation we were playing, I'm not sure whether I'd describe it as 3 at the back or 5 at the back, but the most accurate description was that we had 8 players standing permanently within the width of the penalty box up the middle of the pitch and two "wing backs" (who evidently can't play that position very well). The end result was that whenever Killie got the ball there seemed to be acres of space for them to pass it around whilst when we had the ball we struggled to find any space whatsoever. It's not as if Killie were playing some incredibly fluent pass and move football either, they looked completely average but our shambles of a system handed the first half to them on a plate.

 

In the second half we changed the system and looked decent until we were 2-0 up, then after they scored we gave up trying to go forward and camped in our own penalty box until the end of the game. As for performances:

 

Langfield - same story as ever, can't kick, flaps at crosses but is capable of making the odd good save. Of the two I remember one was a genuinely good save and the other he got lucky with because he came to take a cross, fumbled it and some Killie player was standing right in front of him and smashed it off him before he knew anything about it.

 

Strikers - all of them actually played fairly well at times, Mackie looked good in the second half, Brewster looked good in the first half but got tired quickly. Lovell had a good second half and even Miller held the ball up well when he came on. I'd actually rather start with Miller than Brewster and bring Brewster on towards the end of the game.

What role was Dan Smith being asked to play within the defense?

 

I get the feeling that like our Strike force (4 1 dimensional players that fit well together) Smith might be a good cog in the Defense when say Ando, Hart and Considine are his partners but perhaps he isn't used to working with Byrne?

 

Just a thought...

I think to get the benefit of Brewster our midfield have to collectively grow a set and start making forward runs off the ball - i know, radical or what, eh? Perhaps this will bring out the best in Nicholson too. It's all very well Brewster holding the ball up, but if no one is running off him he's going to look pretty garbage.

I'll buy that BB,

 

An active midfield makes your strikers more effectivebecause they are not the only source of offence.