St Mirren V Motherwell 14/09/2013

[strummer]

It was reasonable for Danny to try something new even if just to show the fans he knows the previous wasn't working.

It isn't easy. The thread about our best 1st 11 had no real consensus at all.

The thee aspects of the 3-5-2 formation that didn't work in my opinion were the lack of shuttling to the left and use of the left wing going forward as mentioned above and how to use a second centre forward.

I thought Cornell had a good game, but would be interested to have heard the conversation post match re: the ball across goal in the first half and the header off the bar as to whether it was the defenders at fault or him.

Back three, apart from the above two instances played well. McAuland kept it simple and defended well. Goodwin despite taking the ball short one too many times played reasonably well. McGregor already mentioned.

Grainger and Harkins as above. Newton, should have shot in the first half but played well an was relativley solid as were McGowan and Teale in my opinion.

Thompson, had a thankless task. He won plenty in the air, but didn't have a lot played to feet and only a few crosses to get on the end of. Bahoken, a lot of the criticism is over the top. It takes time to adapt and he did try to move about and get involved but often didn't get the pass to feet or in front of him.

Anyway 9 points from being overtaken 1 point away from the nearest team above us and only one result away from turning the crippling lack of confidence around.

good post..about sums it up..if i could be arsed i would have wrote this..

Edited September 15, 2013 by strummer

[Stuart Dickson]

I think some of you are being far too kind to Danny Grainger in your summation of the match. He was absolutely shocking. For me Grainger was to blame for the lost goal. He was underneath the ball as Sutton came from behind him to head home. Grainger didn't attack the ball, I don't even think he got off the ground. He knew he'd messed up and you could see him taking the blame at the time.

You'd think he'd come out pumped up for the second half - as any professional would - but he didn't. Instead he put in one of the most workshy sullied performances I've ever seen from a St Mirren player on the left hand side, and as I said yesterday I saw Mo Camara play. Tsu says he had two Motherwell men to pick up, maybe so but did he ever do it? I didn't see him do it once. Both Hammell and McFadden were given complete freedom to play in front and behind Grainger. Someone else said the formation left Grainger too deep - did it f**k. Maybe it should have done, but the Grainger I watched yesterday was playing in a wide position in advance of the rest of the midfield. When we lost possession he made absolutely no attempt to get back and cover. There was just absolutely nothing from him at all.

Finally when Grainger did get on the ball - a very very rate occurrence yesterday his passing was shite. The one I specifically remember was him picking the ball up half way inside the opposition half. He looked up to see the the new lad infront of him slightly to the left of centre, and Teale behind him on the opposite wing. Somehow from that he opted to play the ball to the right straight to the spare Motherwell centre half who was in at least 20 yards of space with no St Mirren player near him. Who was that ball supposed to be aimed at? It was just utter shite.

The only other contribution from Grainger to the game that I can remember was a corner kick where whether it was deliberate or not he sent in an inswinger that may have threatened if the ball had more dip on it, but it didn't and instead it went straight out for a goal kick.

I can only hope that the throwing of the bottle into the dug out was from his professional frustration at having been so woefully shite, and not in frustration at having being substituted cause quite frankly he would have been hooked much, much earlier by any manager with half a brain and eyes in his head.

And btw - I'm saying all this as a person who did actually think St Mirren had made a good signing when they captured his signature. How wrong was I?

[davidg]

I agree with SD and Grainger, he was shocking but the first thing we had to do was stop the supply and Gowser was shocking at that attempt.

School boy stuff from 2 experienced and high earning first team members.

[saint in exile]

I never learned anything today. I knew the players wanted Lennon out, I knew they were poorly motivated, I knew they were poorly organised. What I seen today merely reinforced that opinion.My opinion had been formed by our performances thus far this term. The disgrace in Inverness, the disgrace in Dingwall, the disgrace in Dumfries the disgrace in Paisley against Thistle.Today was nothing new. This question now is to the board:How many disgraces will you force this football club and it's proud fans through before you make a change? We've had 5 already this season. How many more?Over to you SGG.

I think Lennon's time is probably up, but if what you are suggesting is true - essentially the players aren't performing because they want him out - then half of them should be shown the door as well. There is NO excuse for any so-called professional to give less than his best.

[saint in exile]

Thompson,Cheesy,Newton and Goodwin

Leave you're medals at the door

Why should they? They were earned fair and square.

[TsuMirren]

Just watched the highlights...keeper to blame and what was he doing at the one that just crept past.

[aldo_j]

Just watched the highlights...keeper to blame and what was he doing at the one that just crept past.

Highlight confirmed what I thought at the game. It should have been the keepers ball, its in the 6 yard box.

Probably mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but here is my summary:

- Keeper was at fault for the goal.

- Goodwin can f**k off from taking free kicks.

- Harkins should be dropped until we start picking up points.

- Grainger has disappointed this season, especially his deliveries.

- Newton. f**kING SHOOT. So many opportunities yesterday.

- not convinced with 3 at the back, but we did have some decent midfield possession without doing much.

- I appreciate that we try play out the ball at the back, but there's a time to hump it. Is there much difference between Cornell kicking it long first time and Cornell passing to Goodwin, giving it to Cornell under pressure and him poorly kicking it?

- Where are you Gowser?

[Callum Gilhooley]

Just watched the highlights. They missed the out best moment from yesterday.

The guys playing at half time from the disability project. When the big No.11 scored & celebrated with a cartwheel & a lightning bolt pose ,fantastic !

[Lex]

Just watched the highlights...keeper to blame and what was he doing at the one that just crept past.

Sadly we've got a keeper who's young and inexperienced, and he plays like that.

I can't get my head around Danny's thinking on the keeper situation. Last year we had Chris Smith as third choice - an experienced SPL keeper. The year before we had Graeme Smith as second choice - an experienced SPL keeper. The year before we had Samson as second choice - an experienced keeper who had played in the SPL.

Up until last season it seemed like to even be a reserve keeper at Saints you had to be experienced. Not this year, our number 1 has no experience for goodness sake, never mind the reserve. Why? What's changed?

Cornell may be a good number 1 at this level in the future, he certainly isn't now, and is it fair to expect him to be? He's 22 for goodness sake, let's look at the other premiership number 1's ages:

Langfield 33

Forster 25

Czerniak 30

McDonald 27

Williams 31

Brill 27

Samson 29

Hollis 27

Fox 26

Brown 32

Mannus 31

He's the only number 1 in the league under 25, and he's 3 years younger than 25. This is no coincidence, there's very few goalkeepers who are good enough to be established number 1's at this level at the age of 22. Most, like Samson, Fox, Mannus, McDonald, Hollis etc etc were not good enough be established number 1's at this level until their mid 20's. Maybe Cornell will be then too, he isn't now, and it's not fair on him that we're expecting him to be.

[Bart Simpson]

It was reasonable for Danny to try something new even if just to show the fans he knows the previous wasn't working.It isn't easy. The thread about our best 1st 11 had no real consensus at all. The three aspects of the 3-5-2 formation that didn't work in my opinion were the lack of shuttling to the left and use of the left wing going forward as mentioned above and how to use a second centre forward.I thought Cornell had a good game, but would be interested to have heard the conversation post match re: the ball across goal in the first half and the header off the bar as to whether it was the defenders at fault or him.Back three, apart from the above two instances played well. McAuland kept it simple and defended well. Goodwin despite taking the ball short one too many times played reasonably well. McGregor already mentioned.Grainger and Harkins as above. Newton, should have shot in the first half but played well an was relativley solid as were McGowan and Teale in my opinion. Thompson, had a thankless task. He won plenty in the air, but didn't have a lot played to feet and only a few crosses to get on the end of. Bahoken, a lot of the criticism is over the top. It takes time to adapt and he did try to move about and get involved but often didn't get the pass to feet or in front of him.Anyway 9 points from being overtaken 1 point away from the nearest team above us and only one result away from turning the crippling lack of confidence around.

MOTD2: Southampton attacking in numbers on the counter - how we should be attacking.

[Lex]

MOTD2: Southampton attacking in numbers on the counter - how we should be attacking.

Final score..

Southampton 0-0 West Ham...

[Bart Simpson]

Final score..

Southampton 0-0 West Ham...

'Inspired Jaaskelainen denies Southampton

Jussi Jaaskelainen produces several brilliant saves as West Ham come away from Southampton with a point.'

ETA: BBC Summary

Edited September 15, 2013 by Bart Simpson

[Bart Simpson]

I do love a good "climb-down" on here. You cannae beat it!

It wasn't intended to be a 'climb down'. If you don't think they attacked well in numbers then I really don't know what to say.

[stlucifer]

What I see from the aftermath of the game on this thread is that there are so many people, so desperately looking for faults that they all have their own ideas about who was sh!te and who was not.

McAusland appears to be sh1tey great

Goodwin is a solid liability.

Grainger is seems totally focused in being disinterested.

Harkins is a lazy, hardworking individual.

McLean should have started but brings nothing to the team.

Bahoken was,...... never mind.

I thought Danny called it right changing to a 3-5-2.

His options up front are very limited, though apparently self inflicted.

My concern from the off was having Teale, a player who relies heavily on his pace, at the age of 34, being asked to plaay the entire length of the pitch all day.

He is, no question, one of our best, if not the best performer but I think we could have sacrificed him to accomodate the system bringing him on after the hour or so.

The system was geared to allow the use of both creative midfielders, Harkins and McGowan.

I don't for a minute think, as some suggested, Danny decided on this shape to allow McGregor to come back in without sacrficing his captain. He could have easily dropped Newton and moved the player forward and kept the 4-4-2.

To a certain extent his changes worked. IF he had better quality up front we might have salvaged something from this game.

What it does show is, if there is a change in leadership, and I hope DL sorts things out before that happens, then the new charge needs to address what should have been priority from the off. A decent front man to assist or deputise for Thommo.

There will be NO money for anything else, perhaps not even for this.

[Soctty]

Thought Saturday was our best performance of the season. I thought we showed more urgency and passed it better. It helped that Well weren't great, but we were worthy of a draw in my opinion.

Really disappointed with Danny Grainger though. I keep waiting for him to get into his stride, as he's been a good player elsewhere, but today he was once again disappointing. Bahoken had another afternoon to forget too, miscontrolling and wasting the few openings he had.

Next week is a massive game - again. We need to start picking up points, regardless of who is manager. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if Lennon is sacked, and wouldn't have been surprised if he'd been sacked weeks ago. He's still here though, and I'm willing him to turn things around.

[Scabby Dug]

IMO, our biggest problem showed up on Saturday. 'Well had Keith Lasley running their midfield by sweeping up attacks and passing to another attacking player. We don't have a ball winner like that in midfield, and it shows regardless of formations. We have a load of creative midfielders in McLean, Newton, McGinn, Gowser, etc., and they, IMO again, would benefit from a ball winner

[Lex]

Thought Saturday was our best performance of the season. I thought we showed more urgency and passed it better. It helped that Well weren't great, but we were worthy of a draw in my opinion.

I'm interested to quantify this seemingly general consensus that we played well on Saturday. What exactly is it based on? We never created a single clear cut chance at the weekend. We created 2 against Thistle the week before, and we scored 1 of them. We created three or four against QOTS and scored and we had a couple against Killie and scored.

Granted we had far more possession of the ball on Saturday, but that was because Motherwell were happy enough to let us have the ball in our third and the middle third as they knew things would break down in the final third, and they did. Lasley must have made about 40 interceptions in front of his back four.

Motherwell sat off us in the knowledge that they could draw the wing backs forward and hit us on the break, a standard way to counter a 3-5-2 when you have pace in your side. Seemingly this has led to the conclusion that we played better because we had (relatively speaking) loads of the ball. Why? What does possession count for if you do nothing with it?

If Motherwell had played high tempo and pressing the way Thistle did the week before we would have had less of the ball but we would have created more chances, due to the gaps a pressing game leaves. The fact Well chose a different game plan against us is the reason we had more possession.

I'm personally of the belief we were utterly hopeless on Saturday and 0-1 flattered us, and when you look at the two clear cut chances Well had second half it doesn't seem too ridiculous a conclusion.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Lex

[JJ McG]

Thought Saturday was our best performance of the season. I thought we showed more urgency and passed it better. It helped that Well weren't great, but we were worthy of a draw in my opinion.

Really disappointed with Danny Grainger though. I keep waiting for him to get into his stride, as he's been a good player elsewhere, but today he was once again disappointing. Bahoken had another afternoon to forget too, miscontrolling and wasting the few openings he had.

Next week is a massive game - again. We need to start picking up points, regardless of who is manager. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if Lennon is sacked, and wouldn't have been surprised if he'd been sacked weeks ago. He's still here though, and I'm willing him to turn things around.

Best performance? We were shite, thats the worst well team ive seen for a few seasons and we didn't even test there keeper, our players are just going through the motions, they clearly aren't playing for Danny, brutal stuff, something has to give.

[marrez]

We played better I guess but thats not exactly hard given the performances we have put in this year. We didnt come anywhere near scoring and I thought that Darren McGregor, Cheesy and Gary Teale aside we looked inept.

[Lex]

We played better I guess but thats not exactly hard given the performances we have put in this year. We didnt come anywhere near scoring and I thought that Darren McGregor, Cheesy and Gary Teale aside we looked inept.

Played better how though? Is playing better having more of the ball in your own half? If so, Saturday was the best performance of the season.

If playing better is creating chances and endangering the opponents goal and maybe even scoring a goal - as i believe it is - Saturday was quite possibly our worst performance of the season.

[Bart Simpson]

Played better how though? Is playing better having more of the ball in your own half? If so, Saturday was the best performance of the season.

If playing better is creating chances and endangering the opponents goal and maybe even scoring a goal - as i believe it is - Saturday was quite possibly our worst performance of the season.

Once again though Lex, whilst you are completely correct to challenge the statements, stimulate debate and entirely right to state that there were a lack of attacking opportunities it comes down to perspective.

As with your reply to my post about Southampton attacking in numbers you can say the same thing in a number of different ways, some of which are positive, others negative and some slightly disingenuous.

For example to say West Ham defended well would be slightly disingenuous as although they kept a clean sheet the goal keeper did the majority of the work.

I would argue that our ball retention and even the location of that ball retention (being higher up the park) was better than in the games mentioned (apart from the second half against Killie albeit against 10 men). I completely agree there were a lack of clear cut chances but this in my opinion was down to the left side of our team not functioning and out second forward still trying to find his way, as I have mentioned above.

I would also take issue with the assertion that Motherwell could have upped the tempo at any point. They were relatively poor but that was down to comparatively more solid defending as much as their poor performance.

Again Lex, you are correct in what you say but I clearly don't see things as badly as you do. Ultimately you will get what you want if things don't improve, but more balanced discussion perhaps would be better. That's not your fault though and perhaps the tide of opinion is now turning and hurtling towards a new manager, but whilst I may have the black and white specs on here I don't think we are far from turning the corner. One win would see the confidence return, but time will tell if Danny is still at the helm for it.

Although perhaps the lack of countered debate and the flat atmosphere at the game speak for themselves...

[Soctty]

I'm interested to quantify this seemingly general consensus that we played well on Saturday. What exactly is it based on? We never created a single clear cut chance at the weekend. We created 2 against Thistle the week before, and we scored 1 of them. We created three or four against QOTS and scored and we had a couple against Killie and scored.

Granted we had far more possession of the ball on Saturday, but that was because Motherwell were happy enough to let us have the ball in our third and the middle third as they knew things would break down in the final third, and they did. Lasley must have made about 40 interceptions in front of his back four.

Motherwell sat off us in the knowledge that they could draw the wing backs forward and hit us on the break, a standard way to counter a 3-5-2 when you have pace in your side. Seemingly this has led to the conclusion that we played better because we had (relatively speaking) loads of the ball. Why? What does possession count for if you do nothing with it?

If Motherwell had played high tempo and pressing the way Thistle did the week before we would have had less of the ball but we would have created more chances, due to the gaps a pressing game leaves. The fact Well chose a different game plan against us is the reason we had more possession.

I'm personally of the belief we were utterly hopeless on Saturday and 0-1 flattered us, and when you look at the two clear cut chances Well had second half it doesn't seem too ridiculous a conclusion.

Your personal belief is yours to hold. I thought we played well, thought the players put in more effort than I've seen this season so far and passed the ball better. We're still lacking up front, with only one senior striker and the new boy still disappointing.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Soctty

[Soctty]

Best performance? We were shite, thats the worst well team ive seen for a few seasons and we didn't even test there keeper, our players are just going through the motions, they clearly aren't playing for Danny, brutal stuff, something has to give.

Shite? We played reasonably well. Passing was better, movement was better, effort was greater. Still not enough, but better than it's been. Based on that I think many players are playing for Danny. And if they aren't, then as I've said before, I'd want those players not playing for the manager out before I'd want the manager out.

[kevo_smfc]

Best performance? We were shite, thats the worst well team ive seen for a few seasons and we didn't even test there keeper, our players are just going through the motions, they clearly aren't playing for Danny, brutal stuff, something has to give.

If the players arent playing for Danny then they are also bot playing for their employer.

[Bud the Baker]

If the players arent playing for Danny then they are also bot playing for their employer.

Ooooooh errrrrr missus!