Legend. 10 games to go to make the top five appearances of all time. Proper dandy.

When he first started to get a game there was no way that I would have seen him get so many games for us. He could be a bit of a bomb scare at times. But what a player he has turn out to be for us. He reminds me a bit of Ally Shewan. Dependable, puts in 100% and is a true dandy. His hat trick against Dundee was a thing of beauty. 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll be honest, didn't rate him but he's proved me wrong. Mr dependable (much like his tutor imo) and is living the dream that every fan wants to. Hope the club do something befitting of such a milestone. Although, maybe wait for better times.

I think out of his near 500 appearences it is a real shame that lots of folk only pick up with mistakes he has made for us instead of the amount of good he has done for us over the years. I think any SPL manager would be happy to have him in their squad.

 

It was Considine alongside Anderson in 06/07 at 19/20 years old that qualified us for Europa League under Jimmy. I think Anderson leaving the following season forcing the more regular inclusion of Diamond on the right and the signings of Mair and more so  Mulgrew the season after, hampered Considine's development. Was around that time he seemed to bulk up lose what pace he had,  before being shunted to left back. I think when he moved back after Mulgrew went to the Tims, he struggled against the better teams. Was almost nailed on for a few seasons he'd give away a penalty occasionally combined with a red card against Celtic. Sometimes people remember only that Considine; and not the dependable CB/LB we've had for the last 7-8 years since he improved his positional play and concentration.

No doubt in my mind that Considine would have played at a higher level than Diamond did, had he left to England. Never really got why managers seemed to trust him at times then not. That said likely be 4th all time by seasons end and if he keeps playing for another couple of seasons could end up 3rd behind only Miller and McLeish. Good going considering some of the opinions I've read about him over the years. 

 

So do we class any of the squad other than Andrew Considine from 2007-08 season when making UEFA Cup Last 32 as a legend or is it based around winning trophies??

4 hours ago, SeeBass said:

So do we class any of the squad other than Andrew Considine from 2007-08 season when making UEFA Cup Last 32 as a legend or is it based around winning trophies??

No and not necessarily so to answer your two questions IMHO.

5 hours ago, SeeBass said:

So do we class any of the squad other than Andrew Considine from 2007-08 season when making UEFA Cup Last 32 as a legend or is it based around winning trophies??

More about loyalty/appearances to a club,and quality of service IMO.plenty players won plenty trophies without being legends,eg Andy Watson,though you could argue Zoltan Varga as legendary,and even Darren Mackie...for all the wrong reasons.

   I would place Considine just under legendary status

16 hours ago, SeeBass said:

So do we class any of the squad other than Andrew Considine from 2007-08 season when making UEFA Cup Last 32 as a legend or is it based around winning trophies??

What I was trying to say was that its an individual thing who we class as legends. Personally though I do try to consider previous club legends and if these players contributions are at the same level. I was then saying my opinion which I shouldve made clearer. But this way of judging it is also just an opinion.

As a supporter who didn't experience the success of the 80s, I wouldn't say I've seen many players who I could class as legends. Probably for me its Russell Anderson and possibly Andy Considine. I would put Mcginn, Hayes in the memorable players category alongside players like Severin, Zeroualli, Mackie etc.

Legends?

Harper, Jarvie, Buchan, Miller, McLeish, Rougvie, Kennedy, Clark, Varga, Bumper.....

...and Andy

 

Not based on anything like appearance, trophies, famous goals, just a gut thing

2 hours ago, Madbadteacher said:

Legends?

Harper, Jarvie, Buchan, Miller, McLeish, Rougvie, Kennedy, Clark, Varga, Bumper.....

...and Andy

 

Not based on anything like appearance, trophies, famous goals, just a gut thing

Hewitt’s got to be in there. Scored the biggest goal in our history and made a decent contribution to plenty other successes.

12 hours ago, Madbadteacher said:

Legends?

Harper, Jarvie, Buchan, Miller, McLeish, Rougvie, Kennedy, Clark, Varga, Bumper.....

...and Andy

 

Not based on anything like appearance, trophies, famous goals, just a gut thing

I struggle to call Andy a legend, sorry. Yes, he’s played over 500 games for us but we were shite for a good number. Does that matter? And he wasn’t exactly our star player. Definitely a die hard don and a fans favorite but what’s a legend? I see Andy as a modern day Brian Irvine, is he a legend? What about McKimmie? I assume Leighton? Was Rougvie more of a cult hero than legend, not sure how accurate Wikipedia is, says he only played 180 games for us, bunch of players played more that could be more deserving, eg Jess, Anderson, McMaster, Bett? Are all Gothenburg greats considered legends? And Darren Mackie played nearly 400 games for us, another diehard don. Legend?

Interesting topic for discussion.

Edited October 24, 20205 yr by LA-Don

I agree 100% LA-Don. Considine has been a consistent player for us in recent years, dependable and a true dandy. However I think a lot of folk are looking back with red tinted glasses - he was consistently shite in his early years. A solid Aberdeen man, rightly capped for his country but nowhere near the level of a Legend IMHO.

33 minutes ago, Dandy_Don said:

I agree 100% LA-Don. Considine has been a consistent player for us in recent years, dependable and a true dandy. However I think a lot of folk are looking back with red tinted glasses - he was consistently shite in his early years. A solid Aberdeen man, rightly capped for his country but nowhere near the level of a Legend IMHO.

He was a young lad learning the game similar to Anderson in his early years. Considine has been good for about a decade. Once he learned how to use his physical presence he's been good. The entire tenure of both McInnes and Brown, and even for a while under McGhee he was good. 

Everyone from the Gothenburg team is a legend, I don't see how that can be questioned. Even if a couple of them - one in particular - have had a go at tarnishing that reputation.

22 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

He was a young lad learning the game similar to Anderson in his early years. Considine has been good for about a decade. Once he learned how to use his physical presence he's been good. The entire tenure of both McInnes and Brown, and even for a while under McGhee he was good. 

Good for a decade? I don’t think so. Check the posts here, I’d say he’s been good the last 3 years maybe. Prior to that he was very similar to big Ash, good games, bad games, goals, but always good for a major fuck up that would cost us. I think we signed Shinnie to replace him, then Greg Leigh, but credit to Considine for eliminating the major errors that had plagued him his entire career. He’s been solid in recent years, but let’s not kid ourselves, he’s the defensive version of Darren Mackie.

Edited October 26, 20205 yr by LA-Don

1 hour ago, LA-Don said:

Good for a decade? I don’t think so. Check the posts here, I’d say he’s been good the last 3 years maybe. Prior to that he was very similar to big Ash, good games, bad games, goals, but always good for a major fuck up that would cost us. I think we signed Shinnie to replace him, then Greg Leigh, but credit to Considine for eliminating the major errors that had plagued him his entire career. He’s been solid in recent years, but let’s not kid ourselves, he’s the defensive version of Darren Mackie.

You've clearly not been to an Aberdeen game in a long time. He was on the road to being our player of the season when he broke his leg midway through a game under Brown around 8-9 years ago. You could see the point in his career at which he finally learned he could use his strength to go hard up the arse of players to make up for his lack of pace. He's been solid and above average in our first team in every single year since that. McInnes has never been able to replace him - despite trying - because he's that dependable (he even came on at left back in place of Shinnie in a game against the Tims as Shinnie couldn't cope). He's never been similar to Ash (or Diamond, to take another that came through at a similar time), as he's always been able to play football and his positioning and reading of the game is ten times better. Under McInnes, any time Considine has struggled it's nearly always down to poor tactical decisions. He got hung out to dry at left of centre numerous times against the Tims for example, which took a long time for McInnes to work out. He's limited his mistakes in a season for a long time now and the only time I hear folk criticising him still are those that decided he was pish more than a decade ago and can't get over the fact he's made himself virtually indispensable to the dons for a long time through immense workrate, commitment to the club and consistency of performance.

2 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

You've clearly not been to an Aberdeen game in a long time. He was on the road to being our player of the season when he broke his leg midway through a game under Brown around 8-9 years ago. You could see the point in his career at which he finally learned he could use his strength to go hard up the arse of players to make up for his lack of pace. He's been solid and above average in our first team in every single year since that. McInnes has never been able to replace him - despite trying - because he's that dependable (he even came on at left back in place of Shinnie in a game against the Tims as Shinnie couldn't cope). He's never been similar to Ash (or Diamond, to take another that came through at a similar time), as he's always been able to play football and his positioning and reading of the game is ten times better. Under McInnes, any time Considine has struggled it's nearly always down to poor tactical decisions. He got hung out to dry at left of centre numerous times against the Tims for example, which took a long time for McInnes to work out. He's limited his mistakes in a season for a long time now and the only time I hear folk criticising him still are those that decided he was pish more than a decade ago and can't get over the fact he's made himself virtually indispensable to the dons for a long time through immense workrate, commitment to the club and consistency of performance.

100% disagree, he was exactly like Ash, but credit to him he finally learned. Going hard up the arse of players was what was killing him. Endless fouls and getting sucked out of position, then not having the pace to recover. We started to rely on McGinn and the likes as the left mid helping him out far too often.

In recent years he’s learned not to dive in/over commit because he gave away endless fouls as mentioned above. He’s been one of our best players in recent years, I’d say last 2-3 been player of the year or close to that, but prior to that he cost us. A lot. So many fans overlook his defensive limitations because he scored a good few goals, including the hat trick, but at left back (where he should never have been) he’d regularly get exposed for his lack of pace. Playing a back 3 has been a huge benefit to him because he doesn’t need to be so tight and follow his man deep, we sit mostly as a flat 3 and the mid picks up a forward dropping deep, and he doesn’t need to be so wide where he gets exposed for a lack of pace because the wing back drops.

Don’t get me wrong, he’s been mr consistency of late but much like ash never gets a break from the errors he makes, Andy gets the opposite treatment and all gets forgiven for some reason.

I'll take this a step further, and sound like a total prick in the process. I coach for a living and have done all the badges/licenses, and have written papers on this kind of stuff. When you do match analysis you track things like this, and that means you study defenders and their tendencies, specifically defending. If I was to send a scouting report on Aberdeen for say 10 years, I'd target Andy as the defensive weak link. He'd get sucked out of position, unable to get back, dives in because he can't stay with speedy wingers/forwards, over commit in his own penalty box, heavily left sided etc., and under pressure just belts it long. I'd say roughly when he turned 30, maybe 3 years ago, he finally figured it out and, as I said above, it's the opposite of what you say. He's slow and sticking tight is an all or nothing tactic. Now he sits off much more often because he's an older, wiser, smarter defender and for the most part keeps the ball and attacker in front of him. A back 3 has really helped him too as I already mentioned, it's a game changer for Andy at his age.

Say what you want about McInnes, and I'm no fan, but he's the 'expert' and there's reasons he's tried to replace Andy over the years. Credit to Andy for sticking it out. But I do add, there's also a reason Andy has been with us for so long, no better offers came in, and for a reason. And I'd say he's one of our cheaper squad players now. But he's a fans favorite and a really nice guy and to many can do little or no wrong.

I hate to criticize because you are right in that he's been Mr Consistency of late, the last 2-3 years, and I praise him for pretty much eliminating the silly errors. Ash hasn't got there and may never do so. And I was proud to see Andy play for Scotland, his play over the last few seasons has been rewarded. It killed me to see some other players selected to the Scotland squad before him when we've been so thin on central defenders, and I add Mikey Devlin there!  

Very reasonable. Of course, the first thing you'd probably recognise is that unless you're at the game, your analysis is going to be fairly weak. There is simply no better way to see a player than in the flesh. Having been to many a dons game over the period that Andy's been here, I agree with some of your analysis, but I think your off in part too. The point I made about him sticking close to the attacker was in reference to his years at left back, I should have made that clear. I completely agree about standing off at centre half and especially left centre half (depending on the opponent's formation). At left back, his biggest problem was standing off and allowing the player to run at him. That was how he got caught almost every time in his early McInnes years (his early early years, alongside guys like Mulgrew, he just allowed himself to get thrown off the ball by strikers half his size). At left back, he simply couldn't afford to give the attacker a five yard run up every time so he had to learn to stick to his man and be very aggressive. Start by winning the headers against them, then sticking close and using your body so that they can't get going. Most wingers he came up against struggled with it - the overwhelming majority. Hence why, in the words of Clarke, he's a consistent 7/10 every week. Usually against Celtic, McInnes would ask him to play infield slightly and allow James Forrest to run at him full pelt all day long. He did the same against Hibs in a semi a few years back when Boyle was given the freedom of Hampden to run past him - again, tactical stupidity playing to a player's weakness. I completely agree that in the last year or so, since moving back to centre half, he's changed his game and now seems comfortable at left of a three when given a run of games there. That's not entirely surprising, given he's proven extremely adaptable over the years. In terms of penalties etc, over the last decade he probably averages two a season at most no more than you'd expect from a McKenna or Hoban. Similarly, he's fairly low on red cards in the last decade too, with 2 I think. Finally, it simply isn't true that he is heavily left sided, that's just incorrect. He's one of the most two footed defenders we've had in the last 20 years (probably not a great compliment!). He's happy to take a touch on his right and pass it short. He loses accuracy with anything long on his right, but that's fine. There's a reason McInnes trusted Considine to play on the right side and McKenna on the left recently when we had players missing (he was phenomenal there against the hun a couple of seasons back), because he can take it on his right without squaffing it. Compare him to guys like Reynolds, McKenna, Taylor and even Anderson on their wrong foot and it's night and day. For a defender, he's more than adequate - not amazing, but that's not AFC's benchmark - on his wrong foot. In terms of punting it long, he plays to what is in front of him, and it's almost never done in panic. If there's no space or runner in midfield and turning and playing back is risky, he'll chip it into the channel for the striker to chase - rarely hitting it out of play in the process. It's exactly what you want a defender to do. Again, it's never obvious on the TV, but in all my years at Pittodrie I don't remember ever thinking Considine was (with any regularity) ignoring a pass into midfield before playing it long, it was almost always the lack of movement in midfield that preceded the pass. Again, compared to Taylor, McKenna, Devlin, Anderson and Reynolds (especially Reynolds) it's night and day. Again, that's not saying his passing his perfect, but his choice of pass, like Hoban on the other side (also guilty of not finding a man when going long), is consistently correct. Having watched this entire season on TV, it's amazing how much I'm missing and basically filling in the blanks based on what I've seen in prior years with any of the guys on the pitch.

We can certainly agree to disagree and I appreciate your thoughtful detail. I do take issue with the 'seeing it live' comment, I think it's the opposite to an extent these days - you can stop, rewind, track movement and runs off the ball, analyze the positioning of multiple players etc when seeing on tv/video which is why match analysis and video game planning/prep with players is hugely valuable now. You just don't see everything live as fans as the vast majority of us watch the ball. Additionally, my comment about being left sided is his not just with the ball but his body positioning, tackling, and movement/defending/tracking. We all favor our stronger side and he gets caught leading with the left instead of right at times, like many do.

Regardless, Andy's playing well and consistent now. If we punted Taylor and replaced him with Gallagher I'd be reasonably happy with that back 3. When I look at our team these days, Taylor's the weak link that needs shipped out. Always saw Devlin as the better option but bar his first 2-3 games he's looked poor on the rare occasions he's healthy.

11 hours ago, wee toon red said:

Everyone from the Gothenburg team is a legend, I don't see how that can be questioned. Even if a couple of them - one in particular - have had a go at tarnishing that reputation.

Presume this is McGhee and/or Strachan. I agree the whole team are legends. McGhee was one helluva front man, led the line real well and didn’t shirk a challenge, and Strachan is in the top 3 best players to have ever played for the club IMHO (number 2 behind Willie for me). 
 

Considine is nowhere near being classed a “legend”. 

29 minutes ago, Kowalski said:

Presume this is McGhee and/or Strachan. I agree the whole team are legends. McGhee was one helluva front man, led the line real well and didn’t shirk a challenge, and Strachan is in the top 3 best players to have ever played for the club IMHO (number 2 behind Willie for me). 
 

Considine is nowhere near being classed a “legend”. 

Agree with all of that. Strachan was my boyhood hero, and no arguing Miller is top don. But who is 3? Leighton or McLeish? I’d say that’s your top 4. What about McKimmie, who was with us for the super cup and won a lot, plus the appearances. And scored the winner against Argentina for what it’s worth! Is he 5th?

Where do the likes of Bobby Clark and joe Harper fit in, both just before my time?

15 minutes ago, LA-Don said:

Agree with all of that. Strachan was my boyhood hero, and no arguing Miller is top don. But who is 3? Leighton or McLeish? I’d say that’s your top 4. What about McKimmie, who was with us for the super cup and won a lot, plus the appearances. And scored the winner against Argentina for what it’s worth! Is he 5th?

Where do the likes of Bobby Clark and joe Harper fit in, both just before my time?

I think I’d want to chuck Peter Weir into the mix. But you could make a case for any of the Gothenburg team, particularly Black, Simpson & Cooper too. I’d put them above McKimmie (fantastic player though). 

4 minutes ago, Kowalski said:

I think I’d want to chuck Peter Weir into the mix. But you could make a case for any of the Gothenburg team, particularly Black, Simpson & Cooper too. I’d put them above McKimmie (fantastic player though). 

I always argued with my mates that Peter Weir was better than Davie Cooper and David Provan, and was the best wide player in Scotland. Biased of course, and I think it was John Robertson who also prevented Weir from getting more caps. Given he roasted the best of England in Mick Mills, then was excellent in Europe, wonder what would have happened to his international career had he played for a 'bigger' club (although who was bigger than Aberdeen in 1983??!!)

Also not sure how you separate Black from McGhee, Simpson from Cooper, and on his day even Dougie Bell with those two midfielders. I will say McKimmie was the best right back in Scotland for a long time.

Definitely splitting hairs, a fantastic team all around and definitely legends, plying for arguably the best team in Europe. (Was gutted to lose to Porto in the semis in 84, should have won in Europe that year too!)