Robbie Neilson Tactics

[NB GIN]

11 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Simple question - who would you have played to change the game?

 

Just accept all the players we had were either not fit or made no impact.

 

If you can't accept the simple fact that they had better players then you better not come back next season.

Ok you have answered it thanks 

Of course they have better players but to have no shots at goals which you find acceptable is just mind boggling 

 

goodnight 

[frankblack]

32 minutes ago, NB GIN said:

Ok you have answered it thanks 

Of course they have better players but to have no shots at goals which you find acceptable is just mind boggling 

 

goodnight 

 

So in other words you accept we didn't have better available players to achieve a better result?

 

Try being constructive and balanced with your criticism or you just look like a bitter loser carrying a grudge.

[Wee Mikey]

F.A.O @NB GIN and @frankblack

 

Here's a fairly recent example of a multi-million ££££ Celtic squad having one shot and none on target v The Rangers.

 

Bleating on endlessly like a broken record about us failing to get a shot on target given the circumstances is tiresome.

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/18802263.celtic-0-rangers-2-five-things-learned-dreadful-celtic-performance/

 

 

[No Idle Talk]

I feel like we have reached a crossroads tactically. It is going to be interesting to see which direction Robbie sees this team heading in going into next season. We were pretty much treading water in the Championship until he stumbled upon 3-4-3. Once we switched to that formation we finished the season playing some good stuff. That carried over into this season and lasted for a good while. But I feel that teams figured it out. For my part, I don't want to see us start next season playing that system. It's had it's time as far as I'm concerned. It can work against certain teams but it's far too open when you come up against teams who have better players and know how to exploit it. Rangers exposed it badly on more than one occasion this season. It's not just the fact that it's too open defensively that bothers me. It's the fact that it doesn't even fit the attacking players we have. Playing Liam Boyce as a 'wide attacker' is a waste of time. He doesn't fit the role. If Boyce is going to continue to be a prominent player in our first team - and I have no reason to believe he isn't - then we have to change the system. 

 

I'm not going to pick Robbie's new system for him. But I do hope he reflects on how much better the team looked when we switched to 4-2-3-1 midway through the season. The football became quite a bit better to watch as soon as we made that switch, in my view. Maybe that isn't the system that will work best for us next season, who knows? But I do hope we move away from 3-4-3. I don't see us having much joy in Europe, or faring any better against the OF, if we persist with playing that way.

Edited June 1, 2022 by No Idle Talk

[Bongo 1874]

3 hours ago, NB GIN said:

Ok you have answered it thanks 

Of course they have better players but to have no shots at goals which you find acceptable is just mind boggling 

 

goodnight 

Wasting your time, Hearts play shit player's fault, just to suck it up. 

 

The same player's that battered Rangers at home created chances etc, but it wasn't down to Robbies tactics and mentality, we weren't good enough 🤔🙄 and didn't have the player's. 

 

We beat Dundee United with a second squad, near the end of the season a team that if I'm mistaken didn't they beat Rangers at home?

 

Excuses are chronic. 

 

 

[Wee Mikey]

1 hour ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Wasting your time, Hearts play shit player's fault, just to suck it up. 

 

The same player's that battered Rangers at home created chances etc, but it wasn't down to Robbies tactics and mentality, we weren't good enough 🤔🙄 and didn't have the player's. 

 

We beat Dundee United with a second squad, near the end of the season a team that if I'm mistaken didn't they beat Rangers at home?

 

Excuses are chronic. 

 

That 👆 is literally gibberish. 🤔

[frankblack]

2 minutes ago, Wee Mikey said:

 

That 👆 is literally gibberish. 🤔

 

 

Saved me wasting time replying to his nonsense.

 

Not one part of what he posted makes any kind of valid point.

[briever]

6 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Simple question - who would you have played to change the game?

 

Just accept all the players we had were either not fit or made no impact.

 

If you can't accept the simple fact that they had better players then you better not come back next season.

 

He talking about tactics.  We had no shots of target because we barely got into their half and for some reason turned into a long ball team.

[frankblack]

1 hour ago, briever said:

 

He talking about tactics.  We had no shots of target because we barely got into their half and for some reason turned into a long ball team.

 

That would be because our full backs were pinned back by their wide players and our midfield was overrun by a combination of better players and ours not being fully fit.

 

We did fine until Boyce went off but had nobody to link with Simms thereafter.  McKay, GMS, and Ginnelly made no impact.

 

Any changes to our tactics with the same available players would have seen them score 5, 6 or 7.

 

How many times do you need to be told?

[briever]

4 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

That would be because our full backs were pinned back by their wide players and our midfield was overrun by a combination of better players and ours not being fully fit.

 

We did fine until Boyce went off but had nobody to link with Simms thereafter.  McKay, GMS, and Ginnelly made no impact.

 

Any changes to our tactics with the same available players would have seen them score 5, 6 or 7.

 

How many times do you need to be told?

patronising fud, I am well aware of players underperforming, but your denial of the role Neilson’s tactics played is bordering on cult like behaviour. 

[Bazzas right boot]

6 hours ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Wasting your time, Hearts play shit player's fault, just to suck it up. 

 

The same player's that battered Rangers at home created chances etc, but it wasn't down to Robbies tactics and mentality, we weren't good enough 🤔🙄 and didn't have the player's. 

 

We beat Dundee United with a second squad, near the end of the season a team that if I'm mistaken didn't they beat Rangers at home?

 

Excuses are chronic. 

 

 

 

 

WTF is that? 

 

Utd beat them... 😂😂

We beat Utd... 😭😭😭

 

Primary school thinking right there.

 

On that thinking Utd should take at least 5 of Dortmund if they played at Tannadice. 

 

There is claw strutching, mental gymnastics, then there is that post. 

 

A mental slaver grenade that has exploded and you thought you'd write it down. 

 

Your now only not on ignore as you are funny. Highlight of a work day. 

Bongo football banter#

It's a good laugh. 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by Bazzas right boot

[TurboT]

10 hours ago, NB GIN said:

No not really mate 

its a simple statement are you happy with zero shots at goal cause I ain’t 

Answer ? 

 

So if Boyce's shot which led to Simms hitting the post had been on target you'd have been happy but as he dragged the shot wide you aren't happy?  

[Debut 4]

1 hour ago, briever said:

patronising fud, I am well aware of players underperforming, but your denial of the role Neilson’s tactics played is bordering on cult like behaviour. 

As I said earlier in the thread, he changes a formation and mindset away from the one we had all season by setting up the pitch to practice staying narrow on the lead up to the final. 
 

Then RN comes out after the game and all he talks about is how far Rangers are ahead of us.  No analysis of our own performance.  
 

EVERYONE knows all the intricacies, how Rangers have more money, better players, we had one or two injuries, but did we honestly think we saw a team out to burst a gut and play with just a wee bit freedom and it’s own mind ,within the tactics set out?

 

Ive hardly met a Hearts fan away from JKB who thinks we attempted to have a proper pop.  All the excuses are on here.  

Edited June 1, 2022 by Debut 4

[Ex member of the SaS]

I get that they have better players but it has been said before a smaller team can beat a big team. For me the final result started the week before when he played the full squad and go humiliated but their second string, some of them under 18yo. That game meant nothing to either team so why tire and risk injury ( Boyce ) on a nothing game? How many fans thought we should play a full strength team in that game? The phycological effect of that game had a huge influence on our players and claiming it didn't is head in the sand. The excuse players were unfit and tired just shows a lack of management, players should have been saved from injury and rested. Then to the final where were ran out of steam, a recent reply stated, that after a really hard game , extra time and penalties Sevco players are professional enough to put their all into the game yet ours didn't. We came out second half trying to defend a 0-0 and hoping for penalties, relying on Craig to get us through. Not one player put in a tackle in their half, Not one player put in a tackle until they were on top of our box. Simms up front on his own with two defenders and he was expected to win the ball? Atkinson being doubled up on and no help? 

[frankblack]

3 hours ago, briever said:

patronising fud, I am well aware of players underperforming, but your denial of the role Neilson’s tactics played is bordering on cult like behaviour. 

 

Enlighten me.

 

What could we have changed with the players available that would have done better?

 

Going gung-ho with a half-fit squad against the team with the fastest wide players in the league would have seen us lose heavily.  If you believe otherwise you are in complete denial.

[ri Alban]

22 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

Aye, this - run about, press, believe, go for it all conquering tactic has alluded every manager for decades. 

 

Nobody that bangs on about such shite ever answers this  question - what if the other team does the same? 

 

For example, What's stopping Rangers "going for the jugular"? 

 

 

Cause they're not allowed to carry knives? 🤷‍♂️

[i wish jj was my dad]

Same guys repeating the same complaints after the reasons for the performance and subs have been repeatedly explained. 

 

And one or two injuries my arse. It was half our first team we were nursing back to fitness. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

18 hours ago, NB GIN said:

No not really mate 

its a simple statement are you happy with zero shots at goal cause I ain’t 

Answer ? 

 

Since reading anything other than stats is apparently challenging for you, which do you think was the better chance early on, Boyce playing Simms through to the point he was an inch away from having a tap in, or Rangers lobbing the ball from 20 yards right into Gordon's arms?

 

One's a shot on goal, one isn't. Which one was the better chance?

[Fxxx the SPFL]

Mods should lock this thread it getting tedious going round in circles the robbie haters should just have their own thread then they can bore the pants of each other 

[Bongo 1874]

11 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

WTF is that? 

 

Utd beat them... 😂😂

We beat Utd... 😭😭😭

 

Primary school thinking right there.

 

On that thinking Utd should take at least 5 of Dortmund if they played at Tannadice. 

 

There is claw strutching, mental gymnastics, then there is that post. 

 

A mental slaver grenade that has exploded and you thought you'd write it down. 

 

Your now only not on ignore as you are funny. Highlight of a work day. 

Bongo football banter#

It's a good laugh. 

 

 

That's nice 👍. 

[rory78]

I was in stand behind Robbie at Cup Final and generally all game he was telling them to push up,they then did it but a minute later they're back in their shells - pisses me off because Hibs generally go to Glasgow and have a go (why not) when our lot just sit back waiting on the inevitable 😒

[Tommy Brown]

2 hours ago, **** the SPFL said:

Mods should lock this thread it getting tedious going round in circles the robbie haters should just have their own thread then they can bore the pants of each other 

That sounds good but it would just get infiltrated by bloody Robbie apologists spoiling it for the rest of us.

[i wish jj was my dad]

If only we employed the Stendel/Calderwood tactics. 

I'm sure our support wouldn't put too much emphasis on the results as long as we have a go. 

[NB GIN]

3 hours ago, rory78 said:

I was in stand behind Robbie at Cup Final and generally all game he was telling them to push up,they then did it but a minute later they're back in their shells - pisses me off because Hibs generally go to Glasgow and have a go (why not) when our lot just sit back waiting on the inevitable 😒

This is a fact has been for 20 years 

[frankblack]

1 hour ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

If only we employed the Stendel/Calderwood tactics. 

I'm sure our support wouldn't put too much emphasis on the results as long as we have a go. 

 

I'm sure these posters would be on praising our have-a-go spirit after receiving a 6-0 hammering.

[Bazzas right boot]

12 hours ago, rory78 said:

I was in stand behind Robbie at Cup Final and generally all game he was telling them to push up,they then did it but a minute later they're back in their shells - pisses me off because Hibs generally go to Glasgow and have a go (why not) when our lot just sit back waiting on the inevitable 😒

 

 

Hibs are also shite v us. 

 

Some things just don't make sense. 

 

[PTBCAL]

A few of the guys I play football with - some of them experienced managers at a good junior level but Jambos made the point that for 120 mins against Rangers and 45 against Hibs at Hampden we never laid a glove on the opposition. It’s easy to say we were ahead against Hibs and we didn’t have to but you cannot deny we set up negatively on the big occasion when we really don’t need to. 
 

If we are to prove successful on the big occasions then we have to change the mindset across the board - manger and players alike 

[frankblack]

9 minutes ago, PTBCAL said:

A few of the guys I play football with - some of them experienced managers at a good junior level but Jambos made the point that for 120 mins against Rangers and 45 against Hibs at Hampden we never laid a glove on the opposition. It’s easy to say we were ahead against Hibs and we didn’t have to but you cannot deny we set up negatively on the big occasion when we really don’t need to. 
 

If we are to prove successful on the big occasions then we have to change the mindset across the board - manger and players alike 

 

And yet another post completely lacking balance and deliberately ignoring the facts.  Far better players at Sevco who reached a major European final snd with two first teams to pick from vs a Hearts team carrying injuries is completely omitted from your post.

 

Who cares what the guys you drink in the pub with think?  I have mates who played professional football and they have a balanced view on our expectations.

[i wish jj was my dad]

Against Hibs we were getting booted up and down with very little protection, losing 2/3 players in the process. 

 

Against Rangers we had 4/5 players well short of fitness and most of them play in the spine of the team. 

 

I'll leave it to the tactical geniuses to work out why we weren't swarming all over our opponents. 

[Nookie Bear]

45 minutes ago, PTBCAL said:

A few of the guys I play football with - some of them experienced managers at a good junior level but Jambos made the point that for 120 mins against Rangers and 45 against Hibs at Hampden we never laid a glove on the opposition. It’s easy to say we were ahead against Hibs and we didn’t have to but you cannot deny we set up negatively on the big occasion when we really don’t need to. 
 

If we are to prove successful on the big occasions then we have to change the mindset across the board - manger and players alike 

 

You don't need to a junior football manager to know we failed to threaten rangers.

 

As for the hibs match, firstly they tried to kick us off the park and succeeded with our main threat and best defender, secondly hibs sat back for 90 minutes and tried to hit us on the break which left us trying to break down stubborn opposition.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, PTBCAL said:

A few of the guys I play football with - some of them experienced managers at a good junior level but Jambos made the point that for 120 mins against Rangers and 45 against Hibs at Hampden we never laid a glove on the opposition. It’s easy to say we were ahead against Hibs and we didn’t have to but you cannot deny we set up negatively on the big occasion when we really don’t need to. 
 

If we are to prove successful on the big occasions then we have to change the mindset across the board - manger and players alike 

 

 

You're guys sound like bitter hibs who had their season destroyed in a week by us. 

 

Folk can win games and tournaments by defending deep and counter attacking. 

 

Madrid just done it. 

Edited June 2, 2022 by Bazzas right boot

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

You're guys sound like bitter hibs who had their season destroyed in a week by us. 

 

Folk can win games and tournaments by defending deep and counter attacking. 

 

Madrid just done it. 

We didn’t do much attacking, counter attacking or any other type in the cup final. It became apparent fairly quickly that they were fairly fresh (which was surprising) and we were running on empty (also surprising) I actually thought from early doors that our only hope was penalties and that’s certainly the way we approached it from early in the second half. One goal from them was always going to beat us because we had nothing left to give.

 

We have to accept

 

1.Man for man they were and are a much better team than us (with one exception)

2. We didn’t match them for fitness which we ought to have been able to do. Whether that’s just injuries or an actual squad fitness issue all round I don’t know but I suspect a bit of both 

3. We had no one on the bench who you look at and think ‘game changer’ 

4. We’re going to be a ‘nearly’ team unless we fix 1,2 and 3 above as best we can

5. and most worrying for me is our complete lack of a response or attempt at recovery at 2-0 in a cup final with over 20 minutes left to play

Edited June 2, 2022 by JimmyCant

[KyleLafferty]

Why is this topic even still going? Game was weeks ago. Robbie will get some right and get some wrong. That’s the way football managing is.

[frankblack]

13 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

We didn’t do much attacking, counter attacking or any other type in the cup final. It became apparent fairly quickly that they were fairly fresh (which was surprising) and we were running on empty (also surprising) I actually thought from early doors that our only hope was penalties and that’s certainly the way we approached it from early in the second half. One goal from them was always going to beat us because we had nothing left to give.

 

We have to accept

 

1.Man for man they were and are a much better team than us (with one exception)

2. We didn’t match them for fitness which we ought to have been able to do. Whether that’s just injuries or an actual squad fitness issue all round I don’t know but I suspect a bit of both 

3. We had no one on the bench who you look at and think ‘game changer’ 

4. We’re going to be a ‘nearly’ team unless we fix 1,2 and 3 above as best we can

5. and most worrying for me is our complete lack of a response or attempt at recovery at 2-0 in a cup final with over 20 minutes left to play

 

I agree with most of this but think points 1-3 are key.

 

We need to strengthen the overall squad so that we can lose players and have cover that you feel will do a job.  When we lost Beni and Devlin for a while we only had Haring in that area which isn't enough.

 

Before the game I looked at the bench and felt that we were in trouble if our starting XI didn't work.  All the options on the bench were lesser players than those that started, even if those starting weren't fully fit.

[Bazzas right boot]

40 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

We didn’t do much attacking, counter attacking or any other type in the cup final. It became apparent fairly quickly that they were fairly fresh (which was surprising) and we were running on empty (also surprising) I actually thought from early doors that our only hope was penalties and that’s certainly the way we approached it from early in the second half. One goal from them was always going to beat us because we had nothing left to give.

 

We have to accept

 

1.Man for man they were and are a much better team than us (with one exception)

2. We didn’t match them for fitness which we ought to have been able to do. Whether that’s just injuries or an actual squad fitness issue all round I don’t know but I suspect a bit of both 

3. We had no one on the bench who you look at and think ‘game changer’ 

4. We’re going to be a ‘nearly’ team unless we fix 1,2 and 3 above as best we can

5. and most worrying for me is our complete lack of a response or attempt at recovery at 2-0 in a cup final with over 20 minutes left to play

 

IMO we did set up to counter, we were just poor and not good enough on the day to do it effectively. 

 

Agree with your points tho. 

 

Tbh, I'll be happy to even be classed as a nearly team atm. We haven't done enough in the last decade to even justify that tag. 

Twice 3rd and demoted / related twice points to a yo yo side rather than a nearly team. 

 

Our goal is to consolidate third and grow organically and get closer to the OF. 

 

This is the 1st season since 98 we've had cup form and league form go hand in hand, we need more of that. 

Also, don't worry too much, if getting beat aet of the OF in finals is our biggest problem - we are on the right track if that's the case!

 

[TurboT]

3 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

We didn’t do much attacking, counter attacking or any other type in the cup final. It became apparent fairly quickly that they were fairly fresh (which was surprising) and we were running on empty (also surprising) I actually thought from early doors that our only hope was penalties and that’s certainly the way we approached it from early in the second half. One goal from them was always going to beat us because we had nothing left to give.

 

We have to accept

 

1.Man for man they were and are a much better team than us (with one exception)

2. We didn’t match them for fitness which we ought to have been able to do. Whether that’s just injuries or an actual squad fitness issue all round I don’t know but I suspect a bit of both 

3. We had no one on the bench who you look at and think ‘game changer’ 

4. We’re going to be a ‘nearly’ team unless we fix 1,2 and 3 above as best we can

5. and most worrying for me is our complete lack of a response or attempt at recovery at 2-0 in a cup final with over 20 minutes left to play

 

Quite a good post, I agree with a lot of it with my thoughts regarding your points as follows:

 

1. This is hard to fix as Rangers have just taken one of our better players for free to weaken us and improve them.  Hopefully sign a few gems in the summer window.

2. I thought it was more to do with injuries and players not fully fit as I don't recall many games this season where we didn't look as fit as the opposition.

3. Totally agree here, they brought on game changers, we had nothing, GMS, Halliday & Ginnelly offered nothing and we need to improve the squad so we have extra quality on the bench.

4. Agree

5. This was one thing that did annoy me, second half of extra time, why not push Halkett up front and try something different, we may have lost 3 or 4 nil but who cares.  We just seemed to accept the 2-0 defeat.

 

 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Since we're all repeating old arguments I'm just going to say again that we were the better team for the first 25-30 minutes and got in several attacking chances (including but not limited to Simms' narrow miss), during which time they were poorly organized and most of their attacks were toothless.

 

After that they asserted themselves more, we increasingly shrank back, and eventually ran out of steam to the point that after 75-80 minutes it was plain that the best we could hope for was either a fluke winner or pens.

 

They were far and away the better team over the 120 but we had a very bright start that had them a little rattled for a short period.

[JimmyCant]

7 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

IMO we did set up to counter, we were just poor and not good enough on the day to do it effectively. 

 

Agree with your points tho. 

 

Tbh, I'll be happy to even be classed as a nearly team atm. We haven't done enough in the last decade to even justify that tag. 

Twice 3rd and demoted / related twice points to a yo yo side rather than a nearly team. 

 

Our goal is to consolidate third and grow organically and get closer to the OF. 

 

This is the 1st season since 98 we've had cup form and league form go hand in hand, we need more of that. 

Also, don't worry too much, if getting beat aet of the OF in finals is our biggest problem - we are on the right track if that's the case!

 

Everyone surely has to agree that we’re on the right track and the OF aren’t that far ahead that they can’t be beaten the odd time.

 

For me this ‘next level’ has to include improving our showing and our points haul against the OF. It doesn’t need saying that all the points we take from them are points they also lost and that takes you much closer to them, assuming of course you’re also largely disposing of the lesser opposition

 

For example, we lost 3 times to Celtic. That’s a 9 points difference in 3 games. It’s not a stretch beyond possibility to have won the other Tynecastle game and stolen a point from Parkhead. That’s a zero points difference and when you add it to the win we did actually get we’d be plus 3 points on them. That’s massive and if you replicate it against Rangers you’re taking a huge chunk out of the gap. Taking points off their board and adding them to your own board (6 pointers in other words)

 

Its not enough on its own to win the league of course. To win the league you can barely afford 2-3 losses the whole season and that’s maybe 2 levels above where we are now, but it’s a hell of a lot better than 5 levels behind, hoping Hamilton and St Mirren don’t steal points so you can stay in the top league.

Edited June 2, 2022 by JimmyCant

[Bazzas right boot]

13 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Everyone surely has to agree that we’re on the right track and the OF aren’t that far ahead that they can’t be beaten the odd time.

 

For me this ‘next level’ has to include improving our showing and our points haul against the OF. It doesn’t need saying that all the points we take from them are points they also lost and that takes you much closer to them, assuming of course you’re also largely disposing of the lesser opposition

 

For example, we lost 3 times to Celtic. That’s a 9 points difference in 3 games. It’s not a stretch beyond possibility to have won the other Tynecastle game and stolen a point from Parkhead. That’s a zero points difference and when you add it to the win we did actually get we’d be plus 3 points on them. That’s massive and if you replicate it against Rangers you’re taking a huge chunk out of the gap. Taking points off their board and adding them to your own board (6 pointers in other words)

 

Its not enough on its own to win the league of course. To win the league you can barely afford 2-3 losses the whole season and that’s maybe 2 levels above where we are now, but it’s a hell of a lot better than 5 levels behind, hoping Hamilton and St Mirren don’t steal points so you can stay in the top league.

 

 

Agreed. 

 

[Nookie Bear]

33 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Everyone surely has to agree that we’re on the right track and the OF aren’t that far ahead that they can’t be beaten the odd time.

 

For me this ‘next level’ has to include improving our showing and our points haul against the OF. It doesn’t need saying that all the points we take from them are points they also lost and that takes you much closer to them, assuming of course you’re also largely disposing of the lesser opposition

 

For example, we lost 3 times to Celtic. That’s a 9 points difference in 3 games. It’s not a stretch beyond possibility to have won the other Tynecastle game and stolen a point from Parkhead. That’s a zero points difference and when you add it to the win we did actually get we’d be plus 3 points on them. That’s massive and if you replicate it against Rangers you’re taking a huge chunk out of the gap. Taking points off their board and adding them to your own board (6 pointers in other words)

 

Its not enough on its own to win the league of course. To win the league you can barely afford 2-3 losses the whole season and that’s maybe 2 levels above where we are now, but it’s a hell of a lot better than 5 levels behind, hoping Hamilton and St Mirren don’t steal points so you can stay in the top league.

I would love better results against the OF but I don’t think it’s fair to judge Neilson (or any Non-old firm manager) on results against them. 
 

We clearly need to start laying more punches on them but we also need to be more old firm in character when it comes to dealing with weaker sides as well. 

[JimmyCant]

17 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

I would love better results against the OF but I don’t think it’s fair to judge Neilson (or any Non-old firm manager) on results against them. 
 

We clearly need to start laying more punches on them but we also need to be more old firm in character when it comes to dealing with weaker sides as well. 

Certainly wasn’t judging Neilson on his  OF record. It’s probably not near the worst or the best but improving that is one of the keys to ‘next level’

[briever]

On 02/06/2022 at 01:57, i wish jj was my dad said:

If only we employed the Stendel/Calderwood tactics. 

I'm sure our support wouldn't put too much emphasis on the results as long as we have a go. 

If only you knew what a non sequitur was 

[Ex member of the SaS]

This whole argument comes down to people claiming we had injuries and were not fit. So once again why did he play our first team in a nothing game. Resting players was the right thing to do and add to this the phycological effect of getting beat the week before the final with half their team a second string is huge. Over all the last two weeks was down to BAD management plain and simple.

As for having a go we never once tackled their players, and allowed them to stroll up the park. Get stuck in and tackle in their half is the only way to beat either of the bigots. What is the difference between 3-0 and 6-0? A defeat is a defeat and we had the whole of pre season to get over it.( not seven days)

[Wee Mikey]

1 hour ago, briever said:

If only you knew what a non sequitur was 

 

👆 A Being smug type of comment. Why do you feel the need to have a dig and try to make yourself look smart? It seemed to me like a double sarcastic quip with a knowing non sequitur ... sort of like a punchline. At least that poster knows what a full stop is.

[frankblack]

58 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

This whole argument comes down to people claiming we had injuries and were not fit. So once again why did he play our first team in a nothing game. Resting players was the right thing to do and add to this the phycological effect of getting beat the week before the final with half their team a second string is huge. Over all the last two weeks was down to BAD management plain and simple.

As for having a go we never once tackled their players, and allowed them to stroll up the park. Get stuck in and tackle in their half is the only way to beat either of the bigots. What is the difference between 3-0 and 6-0? A defeat is a defeat and we had the whole of pre season to get over it.( not seven days)

 

You are off with a number of points:

1. If players returning from injury aren't played before the final, how do they get any kind of match sharpness?

2.  We don't have a strong enough squad to rest many players against the old firm.

3.  For players to get stuck in we had an unfit Devlin, and Haring who also looked to be carrying a knock.  Trying to press in their half leaves us open to their pace on the wings.

4.  Are you seriously trying to tell me the Neilson haters would have accepted a hammering if we opened up and got gutted on the counters?  I'm not buying that.

 

[ArcticJambo]

We can keep banging on about the not fully fit best playersroute  but perhaps, just perhaps we could have actually utilised the fit players better. It's not like they haven't played football. or even against the OF before. I don't think we did maximise the match-day squad but of course that was in hindsight.  But then me, nor you knew what was actually the status with them all, only Neilson!

[i wish jj was my dad]

It really wasn't bad management. And it's been explained multiple times. There really isn't any point going over it again. 

[VargasDa]

Every single defeat this narrative gets debated to death, over and over the same points.

[ArcticJambo]

Folks, well certain folks anyway, have to understand that while the result often can't be laid at the manager's feet, the performance can however be dependent upon the approach taken by said manager. To think otherwise is pretty naive.

[frankblack]

29 minutes ago, ArcticJambo said:

Folks, well certain folks anyway, have to understand that while the result often can't be laid at the manager's feet, the performance can however be dependent upon the approach taken by said manager. To think otherwise is pretty naive.

 

This has been covered many times.  The approach would have perhaps been hailed as genius if the Simms chance went in.

 

Given the comparison of resources I can't see how we could have changed much at all without getting a leathering.