Aberdeen v Motherwell 27/04/2024

[Stuwell2]

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

Bullshit, if it had been the other way round would you have been screaming for a red card for the Aberdeen player, of course you would.

Oh and whether there was any intent on Vales part is irrelevant, it was a reckless challenge that endangered an opponent, as I said red card in any league.

I’ll stick with my view as it’s not reckless either both players were entitled to go for the ball and no I wouldn’t have been screaming for a red card but I’d have been screaming at Vale if he’d pulled out of the challenge and I’m confident our appeal will be upheld. 

[grizzlyg]

10 hours ago, steelboy said:

I think we will struggle to replace Mugabi and if you look he's started in 6/8 of our wins plus the games we have defended well at Ibrox, Celtic Park and Easter Road.

I'm not going to miss reading the lazy stereotypes of "nice guy but has a mistake in him". SOD, McGinn and Casey all have far more mistakes this season. As for why he's so much nicer than Shane Blaney or Barry Maguire I'll leave that to the psychiatrists.....

 

Everyone entitled to their opinions.  There aren't many people you rate so slightly surprised that Bevis is one of them.  And yes I am one of those that regularly refers to him as a nice guy because he is. Anyone wearing claret and amber is a nice guy as long as they don't become an a**e.

COYW

[David]

6 hours ago, wellfan said:

That's not the point I made though, is it? My point, and that of others, is that Vale is a striker and that a striker is often wasted when being made to play out of position. If Kettlewell wants to play Vale in another position, then so be it, but these tactical decisions will rightly raise questions and bafflement from fans when they don't lead to positive results. Furthermore, and as you’ve said elsewhere, we wouldn't have a forum if fans agreed with the manager on all his decisions. 

You said you were 'baffled' that Kettlewell doesn't see what the fans see. He's paid to see far beyond the basics of what we observe. 

We see Vale play for 90 minutes. We don't see him in training every day. 

Kettlewell has to focus on tactical adjustments, adaptability, and overall team dynamics. It could very well be the case that having Vale play up top alongside Bair affects the qualities that Bair brings to the team. It could see him less able to play his preferred game. 

It could also affect the performance of the midfield having two players so far forward, instead of one playing slightly behind and offering an outlet to our attacking midfielders? 

It could be the case that the management team have seen reasons to play Vale slightly behind Bair because it will affect how the opposition defence then goes on to try to deal with them during the game, pulling their defenders out of position and depending on those defenders qualities, maybe that allows Bair more space to get in behind?

Now, I don't know if any of that is true, but it could all be a factor in his decision.

I would wager that it's nowhere near as simple as we like to think, and I'd wager that whatever we see from the stands, Kettlewell and his team see that and much more.

[wellgirl]

26 minutes ago, grizzlyg said:

Everyone entitled to their opinions.  There aren't many people you rate so slightly surprised that Bevis is one of them.  And yes I am one of those that regularly refers to him as a nice guy because he is. Anyone wearing claret and amber is a nice guy as long as they don't become an a**e.

COYW

I sense slight shade 🙄

[wellgirl]

4 minutes ago, David said:

You said you were 'baffled' that Kettlewell doesn't see what the fans see. He's paid to see far beyond the basics of what we observe. 

We see Vale play for 90 minutes. We don't see him in training every day. 

Kettlewell has to focus on tactical adjustments, adaptability, and overall team dynamics. It could very well be the case that having Vale play up top alongside Bair affects the qualities that Bair brings to the team. It could see him less able to play his preferred game. 

It could also affect the performance of the midfield having two players so far forward, instead of one playing slightly behind and offering an outlet to our attacking midfielders? 

It could be the case that the management team have seen reasons to play Vale slightly behind Bair because it will affect how the opposition defence then goes on to try to deal with them during the game, pulling their defenders out of position and depending on those defenders qualities, maybe that allows Bair more space to get in behind?

Now, I don't know if any of that is true, but it could all be a factor in his decision.

I would wager that it's nowhere near as simple as we like to think, and I'd wager that whatever we see from the stands, Kettlewell and his team see that and much more.

This. It really does get on my nerves a bit at times when Kettlewell is described as inexperienced and that he overthinks. Of course he makes tactical errors but so does every manager. Hindsight is also a great thing. 

[wellfan]

4 hours ago, David said:

You said you were 'baffled' that Kettlewell doesn't see what the fans see. He's paid to see far beyond the basics of what we observe

You're right. He often seems to see so far beyond the basics that he forgets what many of them are.

[David]

49 minutes ago, wellfan said:

You're right. He often seems to see so far beyond the basics that he forgets what many of them are.

Well, for a guy who seemingly forgets the basics, he's done reasonably well with the resources he has. 

[wellgirl]

6 minutes ago, David said:

Well, for a guy who seemingly forgets the basics, he's done reasonably well with the resources he has. 

I completely agree. 😏. I mean hes only an ex professional footballer...what would he know 

[Kmcalpin]

9 hours ago, wellgirl said:

I completely agree. 😏. I mean hes only an ex professional footballer...what would he know 

Yes, thats certainly true. Because of his background, he does know a lot more about football in general than fans who haven't been involved in professional football. He also knows more than virtually all the fans, about the playing side of the club. 

However, these forums / fora are all about debate; hopefully considered reasonable discussion. Surely its not unreasonable to question the manager's decisions at times or are we going to shut that down? We cannot afford to suppress criticism simply because someone knows more than we do.

I was told by a former teacher to treat anything I was told by salesmen, lawyers, politicians and teachers with a questioning attitude. They might have silver tongues but they're not always right.

Constant criticsm for the sake of it is wrong but so is unquestioning support. Its a fine line to tread.    

[wellfan]

11 hours ago, David said:

Well, for a guy who seemingly forgets the basics, he's done reasonably well with the resources he has. 

He's done reasonably well to keep us up so far with the poor resources he has, but that does not and should not absolve him from criticism. He's on course to achieve the minimum requirements of his job. Bravo. 

10 hours ago, wellgirl said:

I completely agree. 😏. I mean hes only an ex professional footballer...what would he know 

By that logic, nobody is allowed to question anything unless they've practised it, which, of course, is nonsense and leads to the shutting down of debate. See Kmcalpin's comment above.

A point worth noting is that it's not always a hard and fast rule that all players automatically make good managers, so it's a flawed argument to suggest Kettlewell will automatically have more tactical nous than every fan out there just because he's an ex-pro. He may well do, but he's yet to prove that to some due to the outcomes of some of his decision-making, which is where most valid criticism stems from. 

[Spiderpig]

1 hour ago, wellfan said:

so it's a flawed argument to suggest Kettlewell will automatically have more tactical nous than every fan out there just because he's an ex-pro.

Ah I see it's the " never mind working hard to get your UEFA coaching badges, just become a social outcast, spend all your time in the bedroom posting on forums, playing football manager or whatever its called on the PlayStation" argument that will serve you better, ok then

[Great Balls of Shire]

20 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

Bullshit, if it had been the other way round would you have been screaming for a red card for the Aberdeen player, of course you would.

Oh and whether there was any intent on Vales part is irrelevant, it was a reckless challenge that endangered an opponent, as I said red card in any league.

So basically vale shouldn't have challenged? Players can't win at times

[texanwellfan]

1 hour ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

So basically vale shouldn't have challenged? Players can't win at times

For me Vale’s challenge falls into a grey area and could have gone either way yellow or red. The ref showed a red and I don’t see that being changed. Some incidents are a stick on red and some are never a red so as mentioned I don’t think Vale’s challenge fits either of those phrases

[Spiderpig]

3 hours ago, Great Balls of Shire said:

So basically vale shouldn't have challenged? Players can't win at times

Of course players can challenge,  but a straight leg studs up lunge that caught the Aberdeen player in the groin area is not a challenge its assault. 

[wellfan]

3 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

Ah I see it's the " never mind working hard to get your UEFA coaching badges, just become a social outcast, spend all your time in the bedroom posting on forums, playing football manager or whatever its called on the PlayStation" argument that will serve you better, ok then

That's a ridiculous binary argument of qualified individuals vs social outcasts. It is not one or the other, and that is not my point anyway. You've cherry-picked a part of a sentence from my post and commented on it without context. 

Anyone can get all the qualifications required to undertake their role. E.g. Obtain a medical degree to become a GP, a UEFA licence to become a manager, or a teaching degree to become a teacher. However, that in itself does not automatically make those individuals good at their jobs. They can be qualified but shite.

Furthermore, in no way have I said that an armchair supporter is more qualified in this instance. My point is simply that the argument that an ex-pro must know what they're doing purely because they're an ex-pro is flawed.

[steelboy]

It takes a real expert to play Conor Wilkinson in midfield. None of us could have ever came up with that.

[Spiderpig]

26 minutes ago, wellfan said:

That's a ridiculous binary argument of qualified individuals vs social outcasts. It is not one or the other, and that is not my point anyway. You've cherry-picked a part of a sentence from my post and commented on it without context. 

Anyone can get all the qualifications required to undertake their role. E.g. Obtain a medical degree to become a GP, a UEFA licence to become a manager, or a teaching degree to become a teacher. However, that in itself does not automatically make those individuals good at their jobs. They can be qualified but shite.

Furthermore, in no way have I said that an armchair supporter is more qualified in this instance. My point is simply that the argument that an ex-pro must know what they're doing purely because they're an ex-pro is flawed.

The managers and coaches are not just ex pros though are they, they have all taken on extensive training and coaching qualifications on no doubt all of the aspects required to be allowed to look after a top flight professional team.

So when it comes to judging players they see every day at training, planning how to approach a game etc I know who I would rather have doing it and it's not somebody who watches from the stands and thinks they are Guardiola or Klopp.

[wellfan]

7 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

The managers and coaches are not just ex pros though are they, they have all taken on extensive training and coaching qualifications on no doubt all of the aspects required to be allowed to look after a top flight professional team.

So when it comes to judging players they see every day at training, planning how to approach a game etc I know who I would rather have doing it and it's not somebody who watches from the stands and thinks they are Guardiola or Klopp.

Okay then. From here on in, and because all managers must now have our unquestioning support, no football fan is allowed to call into question the tactics or decision-making of a manager until they've got the same coaching qualifications as the manager they seek to critique. 

[wellgirl]

41 minutes ago, wellfan said:

That's a ridiculous binary argument of qualified individuals vs social outcasts. It is not one or the other, and that is not my point anyway. You've cherry-picked a part of a sentence from my post and commented on it without context. 

Anyone can get all the qualifications required to undertake their role. E.g. Obtain a medical degree to become a GP, a UEFA licence to become a manager, or a teaching degree to become a teacher. However, that in itself does not automatically make those individuals good at their jobs. They can be qualified but shite.

Furthermore, in no way have I said that an armchair supporter is more qualified in this instance. My point is simply that the argument that an ex-pro must know what they're doing purely because they're an ex-pro is flawed.

I wasn't actually trying to make an argument when I posted. It was a two line post with an emoticon in the middle. I was responding to someone on the board was - in what I thought was a jokey way. I wasn't trying to close debate down either. 

There was also nothing in what I posted that suggested that I didn't want anyone else saying what they think about Kettlewell. Theres an entire thread dedicated to him on the boards as you know - plenty of discussion about him on there. 

People are more than entitled to think my opinions are flawed in the same as I'm entitled to think other peoples are. And express it. 

[ropy]

2 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

Of course players can challenge,  but a straight leg studs up lunge that caught the Aberdeen player in the groin area is not a challenge its assault. 

Although I have sympathy for the referee in having to make a decision on what he has seen, I would say that there was no challenge and there certainly wasn’t a lunge.  It would be fanciful but if you could air brush the Aberdeen player out of the video you would just see a foot kicking the ball, no deviation towards an opponent.

The force of the incident was provided by the opponent not Vale.

I suspect there was enough contact that the appeal will fail.

The Rangers keeper got yellow carded for clearing a ball then a St Mirren player running into him.  Why is there no onus on the player to protect himself?  In our case the Aberdeen boy wasn’t getting the ball and his momentum caused a collision.  

[Great Balls of Shire]

3 hours ago, Spiderpig said:

Of course players can challenge,  but a straight leg studs up lunge that caught the Aberdeen player in the groin area is not a challenge its assault. 

Assault? If he's going to challenge there wasn't any other way he could've done it...I doubt it'll be overturned so it's just one we need to accept, unfortunately.

I remember a few years ago Roofe of Rangers tried to lob the keeper, he caught the keeper and it was a horrible injury, he was sent off but he obviously never meant it , sometimes the ref reacts to the injury as opposed to the intent.

[ropy]

It’s refereeing the outcome rather than the action.

[Spiderpig]

12 minutes ago, ropy said:

It’s refereeing the outcome rather than the action.

Is that not how refereeing is supposed to work, the ref ruling on the result/ outcome of a players actions?

[ropy]

6 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

Is that not how refereeing is supposed to work, the ref ruling on the result/ outcome of a players actions?

No, a player could be nudged, fall awkwardly and break an ankle.  Is that a free kick for the nudge or a red card for the breakage?  One is the action the other the outcome.

[wellfan]

3 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

Is that not how refereeing is supposed to work, the ref ruling on the result/ outcome of a players actions?

No. The outcome of a 50/50 headed challenge could be one player being knocked unconscious and bleeding from the skull and the other being absolutely fine. The outcome is horrendous but the actions of going for a header don't have violent intent and aren't dangerous. Is that a red card?