daver Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 It's only when you see the game on tv you realise that not only could have thay moved the barrier across by half a dozen seats, the upper tier was empty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewarkfanclub Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 Hibs will argue that it was an all ticket game and that there should have been no issue with fans finding an empty seat as we were all allocated a number on our tickets. They're not going to accept resposibility for large numbers of our fans sitting wherever thy liked. I would agree the segregated area should have been wider and allowed fans to sit further back and get a better view of the game, but thats a slightly different argument. What they cant defend is only having 2 of the available 4 tills open at the pie stand. 30 minute queues before the game and at half time really arent on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 While the small area they gave us clearly caused problems (stewards early in the game having to try and get people off the stairs and into seats), in some respects it did us a favour. The fact that the Motherwell support was concentrated in a small area made it easier for us to generate noise and atmosphere. Notice on the highlights how clearly you can hear the sarcastic cheering as we win the free kick that led to our first goal. Would we have generated as much noise if our support had been spread across the full bottom tier? I'm not so sure... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Superwell Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 I read stat during the weekend that it took us until the 29th of October last season to reach double figures for points in the league, that goes to show so far the improvement we've made in the league, albeit still very early but these early points on the table will be valuble come the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goggles & Flippers Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 Hibs were nothing to be feared despite the extra resources 17,000? season ticket holders bring over 4,000. Not to mention the advertising revenue being a capital city club. Yes a few players have been either kippered by streetwise players and dopey refs. But they are by and large young guys and will learn. As for how we deal with the slow start in the first half, I don't know, I think we have to address how the team can be lop sided at times with definite target channels for opposition players. The midfield conundrum is also a tough one, of course it was easier when we had slim pickings, we knew our best line up. Now we're almost spoiled for choice and have a multitude of options which changes what happens in the final third dramatically. I do think when Robinson gave McHugh the armband he is semi-teflon coated, however I have seen him so far buck the norm and make sweeping changes. I think unless there's an injury or distinctive loss of form he's safe. I sincerely he gets his form and touch back as I'm sure he's conscious of it as much as we are. Rose does an unglamorous job and rightly picked up on by other posters, he maintains his starting place so is either valued in his contribution that we are mere voyeurs don't notice or doing what he is told effectively. It's up to Bigi, Tanner and Frear (when fit) to really push for a start in training. Along with guys like Plummer they have to be champing at the bit and know they can maybe bring more. Ultimately I fear nobody in this league apart from the unwashed for obvious reasons. The rest we can take on our day. Only criticism our "day's" have constituted 45-55 minutes rather than a full 90. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelvinBragg Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 I actually thought Rose had a good game on Saturday. It was him that crossed for the shot that Moult hit off the crossbar. McHugh, while not performing as well as last season, has not been as bad as some have made out. A few misplaced passes stick in the mind but he's also won the ball back a few times having done so. Bigirmana in the last couple of games and Tanner on Saturday have looked good when they have come on but I wonder if that's partly down to coming on later in the game when the game is stretched and there is slightly more space for them to find behind the strikers. When Frear is available, our midfield choices become even more difficult. You have to have Cadden in the team for his power, pace and physical presence. Do you drop Tait? Leave Frear on the bench? Play Cadden more centrally? Tough decisions for Robinson to make. The channels between our wing backs and centre backs have been targeted a fair bit and it is probably the weakness in the system we play. Flipside is that it allows us to play three in central midfield without playing one up front which none of our strikers are cut out for. Never been a massive fan of 352 but given the personnel we have and the fact that no one plays two in central midfield anymore, it may be the best option we have. Every formation has its pros and cons... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 I may be in a minority here, but I don't think we had a particularly slow start in this game. Certainly not compared to a few of our other matches. Didn't think we deserved to be a goal down at half-time. Unlike, say, the Ross County game, where we were lucky to be level at the break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoF Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 When Frear is available, our midfield choices become even more difficult. You have to have Cadden in the team for his power, pace and physical presence. Do you drop Tait? Leave Frear on the bench? Play Cadden more centrally? Tough decisions for Robinson to make. I think we'll see Frear come straight back in. I've got a feeling Robinson sees Frear as an integral part of the team as his pace offers a totally different dimension to our play. Tait, while he has done well - I think is only a stop-gap. Bit of a shame, no matter how well he does I just can't see how he'll fit into our first choice 11 while we're playing 352. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 Going by the last two games Tait is a better wing back than Cadden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daver Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 I actually thought Rose had a good game on Saturday. It was him that crossed for the shot that Moult hit off the crossbar. Rose also brought down a high ball over on the far touchline with what I thought was the most impressive piece of skill in the whole game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted September 18, 2017 Report Share Posted September 18, 2017 I may be in a minority here, but I don't think we had a particularly slow start in this game. Certainly not compared to a few of our other matches. Didn't think we deserved to be a goal down at half-time. Unlike, say, the Ross County game, where we were lucky to be level at the break. Agree fully. Went to the match with a Hibs fan and so did not sit in the Motherwell section. Also travelled back to sunny Fife with a bunch of Hibs fans. Every Hibs fan I spoke to thought Hibs took the lead against the run of play and were fortunate to be ahead at half time. They were impressed and surprised by the quality that Motherwell showed throughout. They were shocked we had the stomach to come back from two down. The contrast with the Ross County match is spot on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONeils40yarder Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 Going by the last two games Tait is a better wing back than Cadden. in what way? Attacking sense? Defensively? Or the full package? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 On Saturday Tait was better in both directions although Cadden came on strong in the last 20 minutes going forward. He struggled defensively the full game. The solution is play them both on the right and we'll score plenty of goals from their crosses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 On Saturday Tait was better in both directions although Cadden came on strong in the last 20 minutes going forward. He struggled defensively the full game. The solution is play them both on the right and we'll score plenty of goals from their crosses. Aye? That's where I've been getting it wrong. Can't believe it's that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONeils40yarder Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 On Saturday Tait was better in both directions although Cadden came on strong in the last 20 minutes going forward. He struggled defensively the full game. The solution is play them both on the right and we'll score plenty of goals from their crosses. That would mean a change in formation though surely?? Tait is much-maligned defensively on here (which I think is a bit unfair), and although I wasn't at Easter Road I've been impressed by Cadden anytime he has played at right wing-back. I've seen plenty of criticism of a few of our defenders recently, with Dunne and Tait being the two getting it most in the neck. I genuinely believe that the 3-5-2 leaves huge gaps all over the place but particularly in between the left/right centre backs and left/right wing backs will always be a concern...any manager worth their salt will try to punish us in these areas, but I suppose thats got to be weighed up against the pros of that formation as well. We look much more assured in the middle of defence, and it allows us to play with three in midfield, without playing 1 striker. In short, its just one of those things...every formation has its weaknesses and it doesnt need to be the players fault. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 I've seen plenty of criticism of a few of our defenders recently, with Dunne and Tait being the two getting it most in the neck. I genuinely believe that the 3-5-2 leaves huge gaps all over the place but particularly in between the left/right centre backs and left/right wing backs will always be a concern...any manager worth their salt will try to punish us in these areas, but I suppose thats got to be weighed up against the pros of that formation as well. We look much more assured in the middle of defence, and it allows us to play with three in midfield, without playing 1 striker. Whilst I think Tait is weak defensively, and Dunne is still finding his feet in a new team after months out of the game, you're right. The 3-5-2 formation does leave gaps on the wings when we're defending and you can see teams trying to exploit this ie Kilmarnock and Hibs. However if we're getting results...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 I see the club are appealing Tait's yellow card http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41317812 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grizzlyg Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 maybe just me but I feel appealing yellow card is pointless. If it had been a 2nd yellow and he was sent off then yes I would agree but not when it was only a yellow. Yes it was a penalty but Dickie throwing his arms up in the air didn't help his cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_P Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 maybe just me but I feel appealing yellow card is pointless. If it had been a 2nd yellow and he was sent off then yes I would agree but not when it was only a yellow. Yes it was a penalty but Dickie throwing his arms up in the air didn't help his cause. All things being equal I'd tend to agree. But as has been proven time and time again when it comes to officiating and the decisions reached by the appeals panel it is blatantly obviously that things aren't equal. That being the case, if we can afford it and we aren't going to get hauled up for frivolous appeals if there's any dubiety whatsoever and the option is available to us, then we appeal. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 I don't have a problem with the appeal itself. However, Tait is guilty of what a lot of players are guilty of, and that was "enhancing" the claim with some really bad acting. It's doing things like that that make it even more difficult for refs and increases the number of wrong decisions; the last thing we need given the current standard on display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellowell Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 Don't get it the league made a big thing start of this season about players getting penalties when no contact and said any such player would get a retrospective 2 game ban yet twice now happened to us and both players get off scot free . If they uphold Tait,s booking then must look at Boyle dive as that's cheating all day long Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggischomper Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 He's embellished it, yes, but he's not guilty of simulation which is what the yellow is for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 He's embellished it, yes, but he's not guilty of simulation which is what the yellow is for. Like I said, I'm not against the appeal. Just pointing out it's theatrics like that that have refs making bad decisions in and around the penalty box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wishielad Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 If appeals are treated, genuinely, as presenting evidence to demonstrate refereeing errors/incorrect decisions, then there is a clear case for this appeal. Agree with weeyin re his point on theatrics but are the Scottish footballing authorities being genuine about appeals: the two simulated incidents against us would suggest not. This is reinforced by the decision to penalise Schalk for his simulation. More generally, I find it hard to recall an era when Scottish match officials were so arrogant and incompetent. (maybe they're copying Regan and Doncaster). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coop91 Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 The refs decision should have been made if he seen taits foot being trod on. The theatrics of the arm waving should not influence his decision. So I think tait is guilty of nothing more than over acting a stone wall penalty. Ive heard pundits in the past say that you're unlikely to get a penalty awarded unless you go down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.