Kmcalpin

There are agents and agents as the powers that be at Fir Park will tell you. Some are honourable and conduct themselves as you say. Others are ruthless and don't care about their clients; they simply want their dosh. As far as careers go not everyone is money oriented and desperate to become the next CEO by the time they're 23. In some cases a move for more money might be premature or simply not be right. I've seen colleagues turn down far better paid positions because they didn't like the company, their methods or their personnel. Money is important yes, but its certainly not the end all and be all.

Our fans wouldn't like his brand of football or his reluctance to use bring young players on . He has done very well at St Johnstone and built solid teams. Not great to watch, not exciting but they're competitive, consistent, physical, streetwise, experienced and don't make many mistakes. He likes players with a combative and abrasive attitude like your Murray Davidsons, Liam Craigs and Paul Patons. Not making mistakes is his trademark. In our league that will guarantee you a mid table slot. He's not great at bringing young players on. For some years now St Johnstone have paid higher wages than us (not by a huge amount) despite having smaller crowds. I'd like to know how they balance the books.

Just watched the TV highlights and the time and space the Hearts player was given to cross the ball into our box for their goal was criminal. He was allowed to pick his spot. That put our defence under unnecessary pressure. We're not good at closing teams down outside our penalty area.

It means leaving his post but continuing to be paid and continuing to carry out parts of his job.

As Shaka says above we are in our wee group of 4 teams at the bottom until the end of the season. That doesn't mean that we won't improve when injured players return or we have a good January window. I'm confident though we have enough to finish in 9th or 10th place. If we can beat those teams below us anything we take from sides above us will be a bonus. However we should go out to win every game.

Don't get me wrong Iain, the team should go all out to win these games and they have to believe but its just that I have low expectations this week and next. Just now I have little confidence that the team won't make a crucial error against better sides whilst the oppostion makes none. There's little in these games but just enough to deny us a point, as we've seen often this campaign so far.

The support seems to be split about David Turnbull. FWIW my view is that he should sign a year's deal or 2 years at the most, with us before moving on. He's got a lot to learn yet but he doesn't want to end up in Chris Cadden's position. He should be aware though that his agent's view will be heavily influenced by the prospect of a nice fat fee. That said I do understand those fans who are "advising" him to jump to a bigger club.

Calm down folks. Not a game we were ever likely to take anything from (same again next week and at Parkhed) but both Accies and St Mirren got beaten (Saints also dropped a goal on us). Our big games come at the end of the month.

There are "roasters" in all 3 home stands, probably least in the POD Stand and most in the East. Its down to capacity & demographics.

Absolutely. Jersey pulling goes on week in week out and is rarely punished. Danny Johnson was blatantly pulled to the ground last Saturday at Livingston in the box and no foul was given. You just need to look at post match pictures to see the amount of jersey pulling that goes on. Its a foul!

My thoughts exactly. There is a huge gap between youth football and first team football but you'd think that fitness wouldn't and shouldn't be one of them. Surely thats down to the sports science team? If a player is being given all the advice and help necessay from the managerial staff and ignoring it then thats a different matter; but thats not the case here. Puzzling.

Maybe that was a factor in his selection last night.

Its been that way ever since I can recall at these games. At games involving Celtic, Rangers and Sevco our home attendance drops by about 1,000. Nothing new.

Very "interesting team selection. Full of defensive players but little in the way of attacking options or pace. Relying on the long ball (to who?) and set pieces? I thought Allan Campbell had earned a rest and by the way he played at Livingston he needs it badly. We can draw conclusions at 9.45 as to how effective it proves to be. No red cards or penalties conceded tonight - please!

Wouldn't argue with that reasoning. I'd also start Bowman ahead of Johnson as we'll need some strong runners up front and incursions into the Celtic box may be few and far between. .

Robbo also made comments about changing the squad in January and having to move players on to bring some in. As there's very few of Mark McGhee's signings now left, that to me is an admission that he's got it a bit wrong so far, both in terms of last summer's signings and those before that. I suppose an obvious one is Conor Sammon, although in his case it may be possible to terminate his loan prematurely. Hopefully budgets will allow us to recall Jake Hastie from Alloa to give him an overdue chance. David Turnbull is an interesting one. One or two had concerns about the club saying we were "hopeful" of extending his deal. Robbo has now clarified that by saying the lad himself is keen to stay but his agents are not persuaded; so the question is what influence does he have over his agents? Interesing too that our fans divided over him. Some want him to stay others want him to leave. For my part I think he he ought to give it another year or perhaps two at the most as he's still only 19. He should look to the likes of Lee Erwin, Robbie Leitch, and Alan Martin to see where they ended up.

Absolutely. Whilst the headlines might be off putting I can't really disagree with much that he's said and am surprised at the reaction on here. The only thing I'd take issue with though is his statement that he was forced to play footballers. As I said on the weekend's matchday thread he did have other options, but as far as I can tell chose not to use them. Now I like open expansive football on the deck as much as the next fan, but on our budget there are limits. To allow the "footballers" to play their game you have to be physical enough to compete and win the ball first. Its difficult to play exciting football if you don't have the ball. On Saturday, Livingston, not us, dictated how the game would be played. Not surprisingly they chose to play to their strengths. Make no mistake the best teams are physically hard and robust when they need to be i.e. to gain possession. My only concern is one which Clackscat raised above and one which I hadn't thought of before. To play a high pressing and physical game, as Robbo, promotes, it does put the players under a lot of physical strain and maybe that isn't sustainable. We should watch Livingston with interest to see if they crack. As far as Bigi is concerned you're spot on. He's not the sole reason we're doing poorly this season but he is one of a good number of players who are either not good enough or are off form. Seeing as his name has been raised specifcally though he is in the team to provide creativity and to be blunt has been very inconsistent in that role (no player plays well every week). When we're on top he plays well but when we're not he is anonymous. Last Saturday for example, the type of game didn't suit him, nor did the pitch, but he did have several opportunities in the first 45 to provide a spark or create opening but he didn't or couldn't. Defensively he's always been weak (tracking back and losing his man) and thats a consistent feature of his game ie against Aberdeen and again last weekend. Now the question then arises is his attacking prowess so good that we should build a midfield around him and select players to specifically compensate for his deficiencies? I just don't think so. In short if he's picked to play he might create attacking opportunities once every 2/3/4 weeks but he'll cause defensive problems every week.

There will be quite a few cuts and bruises after Saturday's battle, so that might influence team selection. Irrespective of the result last weekend this will be a different kind of game and requires a change in team selection. As said recently its horses for courses.

Yes. Young players are inconsistent and have to be carefully nursed but not mollycoddled. In our model, the Barry Maguires and David Turnbulls provide the skill and quality and the older pros should provide the reliability, stability and consistency but thats not how its turned out so far unfortunately.

To a great extent yes. We've had a bad run of injuries this season and that certainly hasn't helped. Whilst we do lack creativity and badly, what we have lacked so far this campaign is solid, reliable no nonsense players of a calibre equivalent to Premiership positions 7/8. These guys don't come expensive just ask Livingston. OK the quality of football isn't great but they perform reasonably well week in week out without setting the heather on fire but by the same token they don't make many errors. Too often this term our players just haven't proved to be reliable or consistent as you rightly point out.

My opinion is based on an article I read on this messageboard ie to the effect that "management" saw a future for him in midfield. He also played there for a short spell there yesterday. He's not your bog standard big bruiser of a centre back but is, as you acknowledge, a cultured player. Time will tell.

I picked up Robbo's comment recently that Milo posted earlier on the matchday thread. "Robinson said in the press yesterday he fears/expects our “better players” to leave in January? Which ones would that be?!?!" I must admit to being curious myself. Other things being equal, which they're not, I would have said, Carson, Tanner, Cadden, Gillespie, Dunne, Turnbull and Campbell. Realistically I'd narrow that down to Cadden, Turnbull and Campbell. A curious quote.

Barry Maguire Ok he'll have better games than he did yesterday but he was onwe of the better performers. If he continues to develop he'll have a real future in the game, maybe in midfield? Yesterday he overdid the fancy stuff at times and got caught out but he's a decent prospect. A few months in the gym and work with the sports scientist will bulk him up and he'll go from strength to strength.

I take your point Yorky; it isn't easy but thats what the manager is paid for. Gorrin could justifiably ask why he was dropped after playing reasonably well last week when he came on. I'm a firm believer in horses for courses and what might work against one team might not work against another. We're not good enough to play the same way week in week out and say let the opposition worry about us. On paper the Aberdeen home game and Livingston away game were very different matches as will the Celtic game be next week.

I'll hold my hand up and say I was maybe the single one. Yes, hindsight is wonderful thing and I had no idea just how bad we were going to be but I had my reservations. What could we have done differently? Quite a lot actually. Keeper: no problem with Gillespie and he didn't let us down, despite being given no protection. Defence: limited options. Donnelly in for Maguire? Debatable at best. Midfield: my biggest grouse. Playing a physical, streetwise team like Livingston on their own patch on a plastic pitch set up for a midfield battle? Safety first approach in my view. Campbell needs an extended rest badly and, injuries apart, I wouldn't play him again until after the winter break. Andy Rose would have given us more physical presence and badly needed height. A Turnbull/Bigirimana partnership is one which I'd be very cautious about ever using again. Both are creative players who can't defend (this was evident even in the Aberdeen game) although Turnbull is a young player who has a lot to learn and he will do. As Pepper says above Bigi's defending was woeful yesterday and lost men on umpteen occasions. If we're going to be better than the opposition and win the possession battle then yes play them together otherwise definitely not. Gorrin is a better all round player and a bit stronger. I would still have started with Turnbull. Grimshaw? Probably earned his chance but a more physical option would have been Donnelly. Tait - out of position and Adam Livingston is overdue his chance (not saying he is the messiah by the way). Midfield is where Robbo got it badly badly wrong. Strikers: Against a huge physical defence then Main and Bowman must start. Johnson is more of a penalty box player. Tactics wise we were never going to play silky soccer on that pitch. As Wellwell91 said above we should have prepared for a streetbrawl/midfield slugging match (my words)/hoofball/long ball game. According to the BBC we lost possesion by 62-38 and thats telling. You cannot play nice football and score goals if you don't compete and therefore don't have the ball. In Robbo's words we did not earn the right to play. Most of us knew in advance what to expect from Livingston and they didn't let us down in that respect. if, as we knew, they'd rely on long throws and set pieces then, in Jim Gannon's words don't concede avoidable corners, free kicks and throw ins. Our team selection and tactics depended on us defending well when in the box. In my view if you make an error there thats it. Instead we should have been set up to stop Livingston in their tracks 40 yards from goal. Sorry for the rant but yesterday's debacle was to some extent foreseeable and avoidable. Just in case our management don't know what to expect in our game at NDP on the 29th - expect much the same type of game.