Jump to content

The Fear of Losing


Italian Lambretta

Recommended Posts

Pasquale for King
2 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Sorry, I just assumed you had a psychiatrist.

 

 

Classy as ever 👍🏽👏🏾

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 419
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Pasquale for King

    54

  • GinRummy

    48

  • 160598

    14

  • Smith's right boot

    14

50 minutes ago, Ugly American said:

WTF were folk watching today?

 

Yes, I suppose you can call Beni and Haring "defensive mids" but both repeatedly carried the ball nearly to the other team's box and were involved in attacking movements. Every one of our CHs gets forward in attack at some point during the game,.

 

It's like folk look at the squad sheet and then neglect to watch the actual game.

Watched the game live, we went side to side the majority of time in last 3rd.

Why......because we we were a team predominately made up of primarily defensive players.

We created one clear chance, we had 4 shots on target out of 16.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Stone1992 said:


If you watched that and didn’t think they were pegged back at any point no point continuing the debate. 
 

All they had was long balls over the top and hope that Boyle or Nisbet could get on end of one. 
 

One of the subs was forced due to injury and people saying Woodburn was stretching his calf before going off so possibly two. 
 

We done enough to win that game but didn’t. It’s annoying but that happens in football. 

One decent chance is enough to win a game? Does 57% possession show we pegged them back? We were at home ffs 🙈

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pasquale for King said:

One decent chance is enough to win a game? Does 57% possession show we pegged them back? We were at home ffs 🙈


Well yeah any football came can be won or lost on one decent chance. 
 

I don’t understand you don’t think having 57% of the ball is enough to say we pegged them back? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
1 minute ago, Stone1992 said:


Well yeah any football came can be won or lost on one decent chance. 
 

I don’t understand you don’t think having 57% of the ball is enough to say we pegged them back? 

Pegged them back to me means they couldn’t get our their oW n half, they could anytime they wanted to. They play most of their games on the break, and created their best chances when they did. 
We only had one decent chance, slightly difficult to win a game with only one when your GK is voted MoM. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

The thread might not have existed but I’ve been saying the same thing for weeks. Look at the quality of player we have in attack then consider we have scored one goal from open play in three games. Do you think that could be improved on.

 

We could try a back 4 and return to the hated 4-2-3-1 of last season. We could lose a winger and play 3-5-2 like we did at the end of last season. It’s not exactly hard to come up with alternatives but I’m well aware spraffing on the internet doesn’t make it a good suggestion. If we want the best out of our attacking players then something needs to change. 

Yes we can improve. With that in mind - we are missing the following imo

 

Corners - I started a thread called taking corners cos up until Mckay and Cochrane turned up we couldnt take one

 

Dead Balls - again Mckay is clearly a pinger - I noticed he stepped up next to Kingsley - he may be the way fwd

 

Crossing - the rwb argument is obvious

 

Goals from midfield (it is allowed you know ) I think the whole 2 dm argument IS a valid argument. Haring has been coming good of late but the JKBers wont want to wait and perhaps rightly so. As an aside Devlin wont cheer them up either as hes in the  Beni mould.

 

Were all managers especially when we lose so my tuppence might be like this with the players we have

 

                         CF 9

 

          LF                               RF

                          AM10

               CM                  CM

 

           LB       CB        CB      LB

                             G

 

Ill let others put the names to the positions but in my mind we have the personnel already

 

                   

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Are they stats of those that DOMINATED a game? One that had more chances than the opposition? Who’s GK was named man of the match? Were you happy with the draw? Did you enjoy it like the absolute joke of a manager?

57% possession is pretty much dominant, yes.  Given we were poor for the first 20 minutes, especially.

 

We did have more chances than them, they were better at hitting the target from long range, and Gordon and Macey both had some excellent saves.  We also had the two best chances, both of which sound have been scored.  Ginnelly's header particularly annoyed me because if he heads it back across he either scores or Boyce has a tap-in.

 

No, I wasn't happy with a draw,and I didn't particularly enjoy the game, but we weren't negative 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pasquale for King said:

Pegged them back to me means they couldn’t get our their oW n half, they could anytime they wanted to. They play most of their games on the break, and created their best chances when they did. 
We only had one decent chance, slightly difficult to win a game with only one when your GK is voted MoM. 


We had them pegged back. All they could do is play it long in behind and Hope Boyle or Nisbet gets on the end of it. They can’t play on the counter if we don’t have them pegged back surely? 
 

One chance is all you need sometimes. If it goes in we win. We had other where Gino should have squared it to Boyce. We could have scored from any of our first 3 corners as well. 
 

Either keeper could have got MoM, both made good saves. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
8 minutes ago, Diego10 said:

57% possession is pretty much dominant, yes.  Given we were poor for the first 20 minutes, especially.

 

We did have more chances than them, they were better at hitting the target from long range, and Gordon and Macey both had some excellent saves.  We also had the two best chances, both of which sound have been scored.  Ginnelly's header particularly annoyed me because if he heads it back across he either scores or Boyce has a tap-in.

 

No, I wasn't happy with a draw,and I didn't particularly enjoy the game, but we weren't negative 

So we were poor for the first 20 minutes but dominant? 
Ginnelly should’ve squared it but that and the GMS chance was it in 90 minutes against Hibs at home. The manager enjoyed that. As for negative we play with 3 attackers and 8 defensive players every week. 

Edited by Pasquale for King
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 160598 said:

Yes we can improve. With that in mind - we are missing the following imo

 

Corners - I started a thread called taking corners cos up until Mckay and Cochrane turned up we couldnt take one

 

Dead Balls - again Mckay is clearly a pinger - I noticed he stepped up next to Kingsley - he may be the way fwd

 

Crossing - the rwb argument is obvious

 

Goals from midfield (it is allowed you know ) I think the whole 2 dm argument IS a valid argument. Haring has been coming good of late but the JKBers wont want to wait and perhaps rightly so. As an aside Devlin wont cheer them up either as hes in the  Beni mould.

 

Were all managers especially when we lose so my tuppence might be like this with the players we have

 

                         CF 9

 

          LF                               RF

                          AM10

               CM                  CM

 

           LB       CB        CB      LB

                             G

 

Ill let others put the names to the positions but in my mind we have the personnel already

 

                   

The number 10 I think is key (woody?) and puts emphasis on a good old fashioned centre forward (which Boyce isnt without anY disrespect whatsoever)

We are well ahead of "the 3 yr plan" and there will be more to come from the mercurial JS - so ...a work in progress 

Edited by 160598
Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Stone1992 said:


We had them pegged back. All they could do is play it long in behind and Hope Boyle or Nisbet gets on the end of it. They can’t play on the counter if we don’t have them pegged back surely? 
 

One chance is all you need sometimes. If it goes in we win. We had other where Gino should have squared it to Boyce. We could have scored from any of our first 3 corners as well. 
 

Either keeper could have got MoM, both made good saves. 

Most of their games that I’ve seen involve them playing it long to Boyle and Nisbet, it’s how they play, whether they’re pegged back or not. Did we press them into playing long? Our defence was 30 yards from our goal at the best of times. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 160598 said:

Yes we can improve. With that in mind - we are missing the following imo

 

Corners - I started a thread called taking corners cos up until Mckay and Cochrane turned up we couldnt take one

 

Dead Balls - again Mckay is clearly a pinger - I noticed he stepped up next to Kingsley - he may be the way fwd

 

Crossing - the rwb argument is obvious

 

Goals from midfield (it is allowed you know ) I think the whole 2 dm argument IS a valid argument. Haring has been coming good of late but the JKBers wont want to wait and perhaps rightly so. As an aside Devlin wont cheer them up either as hes in the  Beni mould.

 

Were all managers especially when we lose so my tuppence might be like this with the players we have

 

                         CF 9

 

          LF                               RF

                          AM10

               CM                  CM

 

           LB       CB        CB      LB

                             G

 

Ill let others put the names to the positions but in my mind we have the personnel already

 

                   

Good post. Neilson said when we signed Woodburn he thinks he’s better in a central role. Bearing that in mind, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if we ended up with something very similar to your suggestion with him as the 10. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

So we were poor for the first 20 minutes but dominant? 
Ginnelly should’ve squared it but that and the GMS chance was it in 90 minutes against Hibs at home. The manager enjoyed that. 

We were poor for 20 minutes.  As much as I'd like us to completely dominate every game for 90 minutes, I'm also not a child and realise it's not going to happen.

 

We started poorly, we settled for a draw near the end and there's plenty room for improvement, but it wasn't a bad performance overall.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bull's-eye
31 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Save your amateur psychology, I was standing beside a qualified Psychologist today who knows about that and played football

for Hearts who was less than impressed with what was served up. 

 

25 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

How much does he charge by the hour, I'll chip in and get you the help you deserve.

 

21 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

What makes you think it was a man, bit sexist but not unexpected. 

 

You said you where stood beside a psychologist that played football for Hearts. Puting all the clues together and knowing how the opposite sex judge you, it was a man, wasn't it  😉😉

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Diego10 said:

We were poor for 20 minutes.  As much as I'd like us to completely dominate every game for 90 minutes, I'm also not a child and realise it's not going to happen.

 

We started poorly, we settled for a draw near the end and there's plenty room for improvement, but it wasn't a bad performance overall.

 

 

It wasn’t a bad performance but we shouldn’t be settling for a draw (if we did) against Hibs in a game we dominated for large periods. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Stone1992 said:


We had them pegged back. All they could do is play it long in behind and Hope Boyle or Nisbet gets on the end of it. They can’t play on the counter if we don’t have them pegged back surely? 
 

One chance is all you need sometimes. If it goes in we win. We had other where Gino should have squared it to Boyce. We could have scored from any of our first 3 corners as well. 
 

Either keeper could have got MoM, both made good saves. 

 

I was shocked to see a Hibs keeper making such good stops!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Most of their games that I’ve seen involve them playing it long to Boyle and Nisbet, it’s how they play, whether they’re pegged back or not. Did we press them into playing long? Our defence was 30 yards from our goal at the best of times. 

Our defence was so high because we had them pegged back. 
 

We can agree to disagree obviously taking a different view on how the game panned out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Diego10 said:

We were poor for 20 minutes.  As much as I'd like us to completely dominate every game for 90 minutes, I'm also not a child and realise it's not going to happen.

 

We started poorly, we settled for a draw near the end and there's plenty room for improvement, but it wasn't a bad performance overall.

 

 

So as every other time we play them under this manager we are slow out the blocks against them. He can’t get the team up for a derby, kept it tight for an hour. 
If they had scored there’s no way we were equalising, we are not creating enough chances at this time with the formation we are playing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Taffin said:

 

I was shocked to see a Hibs keeper making such good stops!

I know I long for them to have another Zibi, McNeil or Makalamby (sp) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
5 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

 

 

You said you where stood beside a psychologist that played football for Hearts. Puting all the clues together and knowing how the opposite sex judge you, it was a man, wasn't it  😉😉

 

The opposite sex love me, it was a woman. You clearly don’t know much about the men who have played for us if you think any of them could be psychologists 🤣😂
 

Edited by Pasquale for King
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

It wasn’t a bad performance but we shouldn’t be settling for a draw (if we did) against Hibs in a game we dominated for large periods. 

Isnt it odd that for all the we play 2 dms argument we totally dominated possession for long spells and it was the final third that was the issue. Makes you think its not the two dms at all

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
3 minutes ago, Stone1992 said:

Our defence was so high because we had them pegged back. 
 

We can agree to disagree obviously taking a different view on how the game panned out. 

It was barely that high for maybe twenty minutes at the end, and was totally what they wanted us to do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Auldbenches
23 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

One decent chance is enough to win a game? Does 57% possession show we pegged them back? We were at home ffs 🙈

You were watching the game next to an ex Hearts player who is now a psychologist? 

Can you say who or give us a clue? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 160598 said:

Isnt it odd that for all the we play 2 dms argument we totally dominated possession for long spells and it was the final third that was the issue. Makes you think its not the two dms at all

I think, as I said earlier, a part of it is Boyce seems to be out of position so often. We are playing some good stuff but just needs tweaked a wee bit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Auldbenches said:

You were watching the game next to an ex Hearts player who is now a psychologist? 

Can you say who or give us a clue? 

 

My neice, who played for the women’s team. You thought a male player could be a qualified Psychologist 🤔🤷🏾‍♂️?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

The opposite sex love me, it was a woman. You clearly don’t know much about the men who have played for us if you think any of them could be psychologists 🤣😂

You clearly dont know much about women if they think they love you moneybags

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, GinRummy said:

I think, as I said earlier, a part of it is Boyce seems to be out of position so often. We are playing some good stuff but just needs tweaked a wee bit. 

What tweaks? Having players in the opposition half would be good. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

I think, as I said earlier, a part of it is Boyce seems to be out of position so often. We are playing some good stuff but just needs tweaked a wee bit. 

Yeah (I wasnt having a go) it was a genuine thought - just occured to me - I agree (I stopped short of saying do we have a good old fashioned no 9 - ahem nando)

Edited by 160598
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom Hardy’s Dug

Woodburn had a completely free role - he was central most of the time and did create from there.

 

I’ve said it a few times by I think Devlin will bring some better attacking drive from midfield and will be a starter within a couple of games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, 160598 said:

You clearly dont know much about women if they think they love you moneybags

Do you know me? Maybe better to just keep quoting yourself in posts. 
Not been called moneybags before. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

What tweaks? Having players in the opposition half would be good. 

Said on the other thread, we do need another attacking player in the side. Whether that’s an attacking midfielder in a central midfield three or a number 10, it needs to happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeffros Furios
3 minutes ago, 160598 said:

You clearly dont know much about women if they think they love you moneybags

:gok:

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Do you know me? Maybe better to just keep quoting yourself in posts. 
Not been called moneybags before. 

I was joking mate relax - weve had good chats on here

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 160598 said:

Yeah (I wasnt having a go) it was a genuine thought - just occured to me - I agree (I stopped short of saying dp we have a good old fashioned no 9 - ahem nando)

Aye, didn’t think you were having a go. Gnanduillet could make the difference but that would probably mean playing Boyce next to him. Didn’t play at all well together when they played up front together last season.

Edited by GinRummy
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

It was barely that high for maybe twenty minutes at the end, and was totally what they wanted us to do. 

You are the one who mentioned them being 30 yards from goal and are now saying they weren’t high. 
 

That what they wanted so we should drop back that would help us create more chances as you don’t think we created enough?

 

Make up your mind

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Aye, didn’t think you were having a go. Gnanduillet could make the difference but that would probably mean playing Boyce next to him. Didn’t play at all well together when they played up front together last season.

Yup it would upset the apple cart. We may find out if Boyce is out for whatever reason.

I spent a year watching the seasiders. The big man aint pretty and if they lost he was the fall guy but more often than not he won the game (but then he needed good crosses !!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
2 minutes ago, Stone1992 said:

You are the one who mentioned them being 30 yards from goal and are now saying they weren’t high. 
 

That what they wanted so we should drop back that would help us create more chances as you don’t think we created enough?

 

Make up your mind

See the bit where i said “at the best of times” clearly indicates we weren’t that high for most of the game 👍🏽
Playing quick attacking football would create more chances, most chances are created with 4 passes, not sideways and back to eventually get it wide to two wing backs who can’t cross the ball to one striker and two playing central. We have created extremely few chances so far from open play. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 160598 said:

Yup it would upset the apple cart. We may find out if Boyce is out for whatever reason.

I spent a year watching the seasiders. The big man aint pretty and if they lost he was the fall guy but more often than not he won the game (but then he needed good crosses !!

Could well have the players to provide crosses now. Not really had a chance Gnando. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott Leitch
5 hours ago, Gambo said:

Far too cautious a manager for my (and many others) liking.

 

He has been given the tools to take the brakes off but will he utilise them.

 

Only positive for me is (as you say) he's been given the tools. If he can't give us a successful season he'll be gone. Savage won't accept that on his watch.  Personally I don't think Neilson has it I think he's a shite bag and will always have us underperforming and under achieving. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
9 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Said on the other thread, we do need another attacking player in the side. Whether that’s an attacking midfielder in a central midfield three or a number 10, it needs to happen. 

I think it’s more than one player to be honest, we are getting nothing from the current two wingbacks either. The formation needs to change, then we won’t be relying on players doing jobs they can’t do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Scott Leitch said:

 

Only positive for me is (as you say) he's been given the tools. If he can't give us a successful season he'll be gone. Savage won't accept that on his watch.  Personally I don't think Neilson has it I think he's a shite bag and will always have us underperforming and under achieving. 

Well said. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Could well have the players to provide crosses now. Not really had a chance Gnando. 

Well weve got a bench now. Nelly is still finding his best team and with Mckays intro to the team and Devlin to boot that will continue. Also Jan window will be here before you can say christmas. Freshen things up. Surprised there hasnt been chat on here about in fact it im gonna star a new thread on............

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Scott Leitch said:

 

Only positive for me is (as you say) he's been given the tools. If he can't give us a successful season he'll be gone. Savage won't accept that on his watch.  Personally I don't think Neilson has it I think he's a shite bag and will always have us underperforming and under achieving. 

Savage has been rattled by at least one under performance this season that I know off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

I think it’s more than one player to be honest, we are getting nothing from the current two wingbacks either. The formation needs to change, then we won’t be relying on players doing jobs they can’t do. 

You could well be right. If we switched to a back 4, if Moore turns out to be ok, then that could go some way to getting things fixed. Everything gets pushed wide just now with really just Haring supporting the attack through the centre. He’s not enough. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott Leitch
1 hour ago, Ugly American said:

Do you not like the game of football? Do you hate it when teams make incisive passes, generate a lot of movement in the middle of the park, and create quality chances that quality defenders stop?

 

If you hate that kind of thing I can see why you didn't enjoy it. Yes, we should have won it, and we created more and better chances, saw more of the ball, did more with it, and generally made Hibs sit in to stop us.

 

I enjoyed that Hearts played better than Hibs today. I am disappointed we didn't get a win.

Hearts weren't better than Hibs. A draw was a fair result. Stop being silly.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
CloustonHMFC

Good performance and effort, disappointing result all things considered but I don't think that can be pinned on the way we set up or our performance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

You could well be right. If we switched to a back 4, if Moore turns out to be ok, then that could go some way to getting things fixed. Everything gets pushed wide just now with really just Haring supporting the attack through the centre. He’s not enough. 

And Smiths at rb and everyones happy. Thing I cant get rid off is the fact that give Nelly his due he has been ruthless at culling the squad all over the park - but when it comes to rwb suddenly a plan appears for logan. Hmmmm

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
14 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

You could well be right. If we switched to a back 4, if Moore turns out to be ok, then that could go some way to getting things fixed. Everything gets pushed wide just now with really just Haring supporting the attack through the centre. He’s not enough. 

He’s only really managing to get into the box sporadically, defending is his main job, feel sorry for him he can’t be everywhere. Same for Boyce, don’t think we’re creating chances for him either, or anyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 160598 said:

And Smiths at rb and everyones happy. Thing I cant get rid off is the fact that give Nelly his due he has been ruthless at culling the squad all over the park - but when it comes to rwb suddenly a plan appears for logan. Hmmmm

He’s always said there’ll be different formations played over the season. Bit of an ambiguous statement I suppose but I think a back 4 is coming. 

Link to post
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.




×
×
  • Create New...