Kmcalpin

Has anyone been emailed yet regarding the voting? It seems to have started but the only mention I can find of it is on the website.

I agree 100% but it depends on what kind of player Lucas is. Is a defensive sort or an offensive type or indeed an all rounder. I haven't seen enough of him to judge but MM will know. That will determine who he replaces. As to our tactics on the day a lot will depend on who is fit.

He should be but its the SFA were talking about here and they don't often do consistency.

Hope to goodness that its not a 4 5 1 formation with MacDonald playing deep and Moult or Bowman playing wide left midfield.

Whats the team?

John Hunter for service to football in North Lanarkshire. .

Wow you're certainly the master of understatement. Hammell, Chalmers, MacMillan, Kennedy, McHugh, Blyth and Cadden all out. I thought a share of the spoils was about right. Both sides mustered one effort on target each in a turgid draw. Certainly we had 3 good chances but spurned every one. Its a game we might have won but equally we've lost this type of game in the past. Not many passmarks for me with MacLean, Heneghan and McManus being the pick of the bunch. Again I thought MacDonald was wasted deeper in midfield (will we never learn) and Moult received poor support for long spells. On the plus side more youngsters got game time and we kept a clean sheet. MacLean is certainly settling into the first team. I thought our Caddenless midfield was woeful, MacLean apart, and not even Lucas, who appeared just after the break, did anything of note. He has a valid excuse of course. I thought Thomas had a funny game - mediocre going forward, poor at corners, but impressive when defending off the ball. He annoyed his opponents by harrying, chasing and closing them down. Ainsworth was a huge and frustrating letdown and for me his time has come and gone. Again I hope we can crawl into January in touch with the pack so that we can completely revamp the central midfield.

A toss up between Heneghan and McManus for me but I'll plump for the latter.

Who is on the bench?

Craig Hughes.

Absolutely. Trying to replace players in the January window is notoriously difficult and I'd hold off until the summer to sell unless the bid was phenomenal.

I take your general point but its the manager/head coach who decides how the playing budget is spent.

Yes, it was mentioned and you're right. The club does not have to let him go unless a very large offer comes in. Given the importance of us staying in the top flight for the next 2 seasons and the increased revenue that will bring, the Directors would need to balance the benefits of a transfer fee against the potential loss of income his departure could cause if we were to finish in 11th or 12th place.

Well you'd expect that the clubs potentially involved in the top 8 category (and there could be more than 8 if you count joint academies) will vote for it. Then there are the smaller clubs who wouldn't be involved anyway - the big boys might offer them some kind of sweetener. So, in short, its very hard to tell how the numbers would stack up. I'm sure I read somewhere that there 6 clubs, including ours, who were dead set against the proposal. Time will tell.

I took from last night's discussions that the idea has been diluted somewhat or some cold water poured on it. The 8 initial elite academies would do all they can to retain their status and try to ensure that those in the next tier couldn't progress. Reading between the lines Rangers, Celtic and Hamilton would be 3 of those top tier academies. Add in say Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen and that doesn't leave much scope for others. I believe that Dundee United, Kilmarnock (who seem to be expanding into Lanarkshire) and a few other clubs are not at all happy. If this change goes through the effect on our club could be very serious indeed.

A good and comprehensive resume Andy so thanks for that. In the short term at least, the club is on a sound financial footing and the transfer strategy is still to speculate to accumulate providing the cash is available. We won't need to sell a player for 3 years. Some money has already been paid back to Les Hutchison and John Boyle. The issue with the proposed governance change is that shareholders were not consulted beforehand and as a few are not Society members they did not know anything about it. I don't think there is any disagreement about the merits of the change though. There was also a brief discussion, as you said, on youth academies. We have a particularly good batch of Under 15s at the moment and a large number of clubs have and are sniffing around them. I was a bit taken aback and shocked at just how competitive the individual academies are; going as they do a bit beyond what I'd call healthy competition.

Hopefully we'll see a good attendance at tonight's Q & A session.

How long before the Rancid runs a headline like "Gers set to bale out penniless Well by offering a mammoth £300k (including add ons) for starlet Cadden" ?

You're absolutely right - amateur level only. A good post and your assessment does seem very credible and I don't doubt its reasonably accurate. I don't think it explains everything but thats asking a lot. Yes, we did lose the midfield battle and that was critical. However I still think we defended too deeply and I think that our midfield and defenders should have been fit enough and competitive enough to defend a few yards further upfield. We really are like a tortoise withdrawing into its shell when under pressure. I don't doubt also that tactics played a part. In terms of this thread there have been some very good and thought provoking posts in the last few hours. It proves that this site can have some well reasoned and respectful debate.

Agreed. Ainsworth is a bit of a scapegoat here - you could see what he was trying to do. We give opposing teams far too much space at the edge of our box week in week out - . probably our biggest single weakness as a team.

I agree that we don't want to overdo the negativity but there were still some very worrying aspects to our performance. If we want to improve they have to be examined (by the management) however painful that might be. Yes, Celtic changed their formation and upped their game in the second half and I get that. But what I don't get is why Celtic would inevitably have more in their tank than us in the second half. In the first half, despite us playing well Celtic had far more possession than us and did far more attacking. They did far more running as a team. So, I just don't get it. The only plausible explanation I can think of is that folk accept Celtic are a far fitter team than us and/or their players are younger. Given that, can we assume that we have work to do on the fitness front and/or some players are simply too old. If we had deployed the same tactics in the second half but simply lost to a better side than I could accept that. If we cast our minds back to the Partick game, which we won of course, the game was in some ways similar. We had a good first half but then totally disappeared in the second just like yesterday. No, there's more to it than just accepting that Celtic would have more in the tank. They are, by far, the most expensive and best team in the league and its no disgrace to have lost to them but the manner in which we did so was concerning. To go 2 goals up and then simply disappear gives cause for concern. I don't think its unreasonable to expect a team to compete, although not necessarily be better than the opposition, for 90 minutes.

Don't know about being biased but he had a poor game. Booked Louis Moult when he didn't commit a foul and then Scott Brown off scot free after he committed a horrible tackle on Keith Lasley. Then he ignored a perfectly good penalty shout when Toure manhandled and wrestled Louis Moult in the box. Also numerous other inconsistencies.

I go along with that. I seem to recall someone on here saying that Stevie Hammell, when offered vastly reduced terms was being touted to lower Premiership clubs but none took the bait. However its midfield where mistakes were made and it really has been a shambles this year. In fairness, McHugh's absence could not have been foreseen. It didn't take a brain surgeon to work out that Keith Lasley, at 37, would struggle and that the loss of Pearo and possibly Marvin Johnson would tear our midfield apart. Instead we witnessed a piecemeal ad hoc approach to rebuilding this critical area of the team.

I would expect McHugh, when fit, to take over from Lasley and I hope MacMillan or Chalmers will be preferred to Hammell, but I'm not holding my breath on that one.