Jump to content

Saint Mirren V Hibernian 29.9.18


St.Ricky

Recommended Posts


I thought I'd misheard that announcement.
Definitely sounded like he said 1700 odd Hibs fans? In a stand that only holds 1600 odd? :huh:
Commented on that at the time.

The only explanation can be that the turnstiles at the North Stand are somehow linked to the scoreboard.

In other words, goosed today!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Either you weren't there or just read the BBC stats..............

I'm going for both, just proves you are unable to put any concise point of view across on almost any subject. :lol:

I couldn't have been more concise. 

I was there.  You were not. 

Longer version:  Early in the match Hibs had around 70 per cent possession.  We had similar in the second half.  This finished about equal. 

They could have gone two up when a Hibs player headed straight at Samson. 

We could have scored when P McGinn turned up on what could be called the old inside left position but blasted over. 

Jackson broke free but shot went past. 

Hibs had several players booked for professional fouls and several were booked because they committed far more fouls than we did. 

Jack Baird didn't put a foot wrong and was my man of the match.

Crowd of over 6000 was anounced at the game. Great backing from the stands and standing ovation for the team at the end of the game. 

Good debuts from both Jackson and Jamieson. 

I suggest that you revisit and lessons you might have had in comprehension. 

I know your school was approved. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, St.Ricky said:

I couldn't have been more concise. 

I was there.  You were not. 

Longer version:  Early in the match Hibs had around 70 per cent possession.  We had similar in the second half.  This finished about equal. 

They could have gone two up when a Hibs player headed straight at Samson. 

We could have scored when P McGinn turned up on what could be called the old inside left position but blasted over. 

Jackson broke free but shot went past. 

Hibs had several players booked for professional fouls and several were booked because they committed far more fouls than we did. 

Jack Baird didn't put a foot wrong and was my man of the match.

Crowd of over 6000 was anounced at the game. Great backing from the stands and standing ovation for the team at the end of the game. 

Good debuts from both Jackson and Jamieson. 

I suggest that you revisit and lessons you might have had in comprehension. 

I know your school was approved. 

 

:lol:

Read too many reports.

You're funny. :byebye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, TopCat said:

Even more abuse than usual this week. Absolutely loving your feedback guys, keep it coming.

Back to the football.

Assuming we don’t win at Pittodrie next week, OK will have had a worse start than AS did.

OK will have had 2 or 1 point(s) from his first 4 league games. AS got 3 points from 4 league games (and got us out our league cup group) before he was sacked.

The question then becomes, now we’ve accepted that sacking a manager with 3 points after 4 games is okay, where do we draw the line for the current manager?

Of course the scenario here is OK says my team is losing every week cause it’s Stubbs players. He could say I can’t motivate and organise this group of players to an extent that they avoid a 3 zip hounding in Hamilton.

Not saying this will happen, but we could feasibly be 5+ points adrift at the bottom by Christmas (not unlikely when you look at the fixtures) and OK could claim diminished responsibility.

Perhaps he has a point.

We’re now stuck with a bizarre scenario where we have a manager who was deemed not up to it by our board when he was first interviewed in May.

Who could have a worse record than the guy who they thought was up to it in May, but the current manager can’t be sacked because he couldn’t sign his own players because he wasn’t good enough for the job (according to our board) in the first place.

Thanks Gordon!

 

The difference is that AS sat in the dugout and OK is standing on the line giving instructions. It will come good. last week was a blip. AS had pre season and a budget and we were lucky to get out of cup group. So stop the negativity it does not help the team or management 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fan4ever said:

The difference is that AS sat in the dugout and OK is standing on the line giving instructions. It will come good. last week was a blip. AS had pre season and a budget and we were lucky to get out of cup group. So stop the negativity it does not help the team or management 

Sorry, this in/out of the dug out it total garbage.

Writing off last week as a "blip" is, IMO, extremely premature.

Lucky to get out of the group, oh, you forgot lucky to beat Dundee.......................more subjective rubbish.

It's early days, our 2 home games have been encouraging against 2 teams who will be well above us at the end of the season.

Overall, our away game, despite what you say, was a very poor result.

Early days. 

 

 

 

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is that AS sat in the dugout and OK is standing on the line giving instructions. It will come good. last week was a blip. AS had pre season and a budget and we were lucky to get out of cup group. So stop the negativity it does not help the team or management 


Negativity against Stubbs OK.

Negativity against OK not OK?

OK.

Wish we were lucky enough to get out our league cup group last year. Or the year before.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Sorry, this in/out of the dug out it total garbage.

Writing off last week as a "blip" is, IMO, extremely premature.

Lucky to get out of the group, oh, you forgot lucky to beat Dundee.......................more subjective rubbish.

It's early days, our 2 home games have been encouraging against 2 teams who will be well above us at the end of the season.

Overall, our away game, despite what you say, was a very poor result.

Early days. 

 

 

 

Do you have anything constructive to add. Must be difficult for you I realise when you neither go to games or watch golf rather than catch our games on line.

Get real F Man

Try going to games.

Then give us the benefit of your opinion.

Others who were there understandably see things differently. ... you just don't see anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, St.Ricky said:

Do you have anything constructive to add. Must be difficult for you I realise when you neither go to games or watch golf rather than catch our games on line.

Get real F Man

Try going to games.

Then give us the benefit of your opinion.

Others who were there understandably see things differently. ... you just don't see anything.

Imagine, how sad making up you attend a game, dear oh dear. :byebye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TopCat said:

Even more abuse than usual this week. Absolutely loving your feedback guys, keep it coming.

Back to the football.

Assuming we don’t win at Pittodrie next week, OK will have had a worse start than AS did.

OK will have had 2 or 1 point(s) from his first 4 league games. AS got 3 points from 4 league games (and got us out our league cup group) before he was sacked.

The question then becomes, now we’ve accepted that sacking a manager with 3 points after 4 games is okay, where do we draw the line for the current manager?

Of course the scenario here is OK says my team is losing every week cause it’s Stubbs players. He could say I can’t motivate and organise this group of players to an extent that they avoid a 3 zip hounding in Hamilton.

Not saying this will happen, but we could feasibly be 5+ points adrift at the bottom by Christmas (not unlikely when you look at the fixtures) and OK could claim diminished responsibility.

Perhaps he has a point.

We’re now stuck with a bizarre scenario where we have a manager who was deemed not up to it by our board when he was first interviewed in May.

Who could have a worse record than the guy who they thought was up to it in May, but the current manager can’t be sacked because he couldn’t sign his own players because he wasn’t good enough for the job (according to our board) in the first place.

Thanks Gordon!

 

I was going to leave you a "confused" emoji, but decided that wouldn't have done this post justice. Where is the "you're more barking mad than Mr Mad, the winner of the barking mad competition 2018" emoji? Get it sorted Div!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure it's because he's still massively unfit and doesn't have the legs to run back.
Well if not.as if we get hundreds of corners and free kicks [emoji56] plus if he was able to score, he wouldn't need to run back quickly [emoji24] But yes i see your point and likely the manager is telling him to stay back.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even more abuse than usual this week. Absolutely loving your feedback guys, keep it coming.

 

Back to the football.

 

Assuming we don’t win at Pittodrie next week, OK will have had a worse start than AS did.

 

OK will have had 2 or 1 point(s) from his first 4 league games. AS got 3 points from 4 league games (and got us out our league cup group) before he was sacked.

 

The question then becomes, now we’ve accepted that sacking a manager with 3 points after 4 games is okay, where do we draw the line for the current manager?

 

Of course the scenario here is OK says my team is losing every week cause it’s Stubbs players. He could say I can’t motivate and organise this group of players to an extent that they avoid a 3 zip hounding in Hamilton.

 

Not saying this will happen, but we could feasibly be 5+ points adrift at the bottom by Christmas (not unlikely when you look at the fixtures) and OK could claim diminished responsibility.

 

Perhaps he has a point.

 

We’re now stuck with a bizarre scenario where we have a manager who was deemed not up to it by our board when he was first interviewed in May.

 

Who could have a worse record than the guy who they thought was up to it in May, but the current manager can’t be sacked because he couldn’t sign his own players because he wasn’t good enough for the job (according to our board) in the first place.

 

Thanks Gordon!

 

 

 

You do know that AS wasn't sacked only because he had 3 points from 4 games.

You're trying too hard Lex.

After your one man mission against our 2nd last manager you should really learn to give it a rest.

Im not sure if you do it for attention or just like winding people up but it's getting tiresome.

Still, at least you're consistent [emoji1]

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decent second half from us but never really thought we would get anything out of it.

Tough competitive league. Seems no time since Hibs and us were battling it out in the Championship. They are a bigger club and have moved on, we always take one step forward then two back for some reason.

Need to give OK time and hope for the best but will be a hard season, again.

 

Edited by Gordon Urquhart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TopCat said:

Even more abuse than usual this week. Absolutely loving your feedback guys, keep it coming.

Back to the football.

Assuming we don’t win at Pittodrie next week, OK will have had a worse start than AS did.

OK will have had 2 or 1 point(s) from his first 4 league games. AS got 3 points from 4 league games (and got us out our league cup group) before he was sacked.

The question then becomes, now we’ve accepted that sacking a manager with 3 points after 4 games is okay, where do we draw the line for the current manager?

Of course the scenario here is OK says my team is losing every week cause it’s Stubbs players. He could say I can’t motivate and organise this group of players to an extent that they avoid a 3 zip hounding in Hamilton.

Not saying this will happen, but we could feasibly be 5+ points adrift at the bottom by Christmas (not unlikely when you look at the fixtures) and OK could claim diminished responsibility.

Perhaps he has a point.

We’re now stuck with a bizarre scenario where we have a manager who was deemed not up to it by our board when he was first interviewed in May.

Who could have a worse record than the guy who they thought was up to it in May, but the current manager can’t be sacked because he couldn’t sign his own players because he wasn’t good enough for the job (according to our board) in the first place.

Thanks Gordon!

I have never known anyone to to put forward such nonsense as a supposedly valid argument, there are stats, stats and then there is TC, nuf said.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...