Ex member of the SaS Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 23 hours ago, A_A wehatethehibs said: It’s all about the group mentality for me above individuals. That for me is the big thing which seems to have changed. We had plenty of individual quality last season, scored plenty of goals, but the group mentality went haywire, the way the dressing room splintered and belief evaporated, that was criminal it just should not have happened with the quality we had. For Naisy & co, up till now, has been about first stopping the rot, then making repairs to what was broken. But now it’s about advancing, kicking on and going beyond. Mentally that’s a big step but it is what it is, that is what we must now see for it to be classed as real progress. Saturday is a real big moment in the season, buzzing for it For me something changed under Neilson, the players revolted due to something he changed. As an example when he subbed Cochrane you could see the animosity and from there on the players just didn't or couldn't take what he was saying. SN seems to have their backing and hopefully that will continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 9 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said: For me something changed under Neilson, the players revolted due to something he changed. As an example when he subbed Cochrane you could see the animosity and from there on the players just didn't or couldn't take what he was saying. SN seems to have their backing and hopefully that will continue. I do wonder if losing Gordon was a big factor. Naismith has talked about how important a figure Gordon is in the dressing room. He is the senior player, so when he gets injured at the end of December, the team keeps its run going, but when a few bad results happen, then thats when things go wrong. Not having Gordon to be the leader in the changing room, Snodgrass is the most experienced player but it appears things dont click. Leading to a divided dressing room. All speculation but I do wonder if that was the big factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggy2 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 A row. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveandal Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 15 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said: For me something changed under Neilson, the players revolted due to something he changed. As an example when he subbed Cochrane you could see the animosity and from there on the players just didn't or couldn't take what he was saying. SN seems to have their backing and hopefully that will continue. Unfortunately we will probably never knew what happened. I always liked Robbie and always will. He has done great things for this club as a player and manager. People having digs at him is just petty. (I'm not referring to you). I got the feeling that at the start of the season the players weren't sold on Naismith. He was a moany git as player and maybe his style of communication was putting them off. He also had a few wee goes at the previous regime and I think the players took that to heart a little. BUT I think he has won them over, and most of the support too*. We look and feel in a good place. *There will always be the a small Neilson/Naismith out section wanting something to go wrong. Just look at twitter at half time on Tuesday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_A wehatethehibs Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 15 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said: For me something changed under Neilson, the players revolted due to something he changed. As an example when he subbed Cochrane you could see the animosity and from there on the players just didn't or couldn't take what he was saying. SN seems to have their backing and hopefully that will continue. To me, the change was after the Jan window. Playing Kuol in midfield against Rangers. I pinpoint that as where he seemed to chuck it. I think with the failed transfer window, he lost his belief that the team would move forwards. Hill was a pitifully inadequate defensive reinforcement, Oda a project, he didn’t get Paterson and Kuol was just a complete joke of a signing. An 8 stone child. That team selection for 0-3 rangers and his bizarre comments about “trying to be more attacking” by playing that kid at CM against lundstram etc, smacked of a manager sticking 2 fingers up at the directors box. I think knew he was bound for the sack from that moment onwards tbh, maybe he knew Joe wanted his own guys in the dugout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopeDiouf Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 6 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said: To me, the change was after the Jan window. Playing Kuol in midfield against Rangers. I pinpoint that as where he seemed to chuck it. I think with the failed transfer window, he lost his belief that the team would move forwards. Hill was a pitifully inadequate defensive reinforcement, Oda a project, he didn’t get Paterson and Kuol was just a complete joke of a signing. An 8 stone child. That team selection for 0-3 rangers and his bizarre comments about “trying to be more attacking” by playing that kid at CM against lundstram etc, smacked of a manager sticking 2 fingers up at the directors box. I think knew he was bound for the sack from that moment onwards tbh, maybe he knew Joe wanted his own guys in the dugout. I've no idea what wen't on, but remember being shocked when I saw that lineup. Can't remember who the other 2 were, but Kuol was on the right of a lightwieght 3 man midfield and I couldn't quite believe we were sending him out to the slaughter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, A_A wehatethehibs said: To me, the change was after the Jan window. Playing Kuol in midfield against Rangers. I pinpoint that as where he seemed to chuck it. I think with the failed transfer window, he lost his belief that the team would move forwards. Hill was a pitifully inadequate defensive reinforcement, Oda a project, he didn’t get Paterson and Kuol was just a complete joke of a signing. An 8 stone child. That team selection for 0-3 rangers and his bizarre comments about “trying to be more attacking” by playing that kid at CM against lundstram etc, smacked of a manager sticking 2 fingers up at the directors box. I think knew he was bound for the sack from that moment onwards tbh, maybe he knew Joe wanted his own guys in the dugout. I disagree with you where you say it was two fingers up at the board, I think it was more he was fed up with fans complaining about why we dont attack the Old Firm and really go at them. So he thought he would try to be clever and attacking, but it failed miserably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_A wehatethehibs Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 27 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said: I disagree with you where you say it was two fingers up at the board, I think it was more he was fed up with fans complaining about why we dont attack the Old Firm and really go at them. So he thought he would try to be clever and attacking, but it failed miserably. Sure, that’s an alternative. But if he “thought it was clever” surely it would require that RN actually rated Kuol / genuinely thought he’d offer something in the game? Do you think he rated/wanted Kuol? I think what happened afterward shows he did not, at all. I think it was a joke of a signing compared to who he clearly wanted; the strongly rumoured Calum Paterson. We needed strength, leadership, physicality. And we got an 8 stone child. I think he played Kuol in the position where he would’ve played Paterson, an AM who could actually compete with Lundstram/Kamara. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 4 hours ago, HopeDiouf said: I've no idea what wen't on, but remember being shocked when I saw that lineup. Can't remember who the other 2 were, but Kuol was on the right of a lightwieght 3 man midfield and I couldn't quite believe we were sending him out to the slaughter. I think Mackay was thrown in midfield for his "defensive qualities" too. Bizarre line up that got what it deserved tbh. I remember an apparent fall out with Cochrane as well that probably didn't help. His inability to change the Snodgrass "formation" was his downfall, whether it was before the match started or during it. Making changes mid game are one of Naismith's strengths. I've lost count of the number of formation changes and substitutions he's made that have had a positive bearing on the end result. The only time I think he cocked up was the 2.2 draw with Hibs. We should have continued to pummel them. Edited January 26 by tiger Rudi Hibs match Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 4 hours ago, Daveandal said: Unfortunately we will probably never knew what happened. I always liked Robbie and always will. He has done great things for this club as a player and manager. People having digs at him is just petty. (I'm not referring to you). I got the feeling that at the start of the season the players weren't sold on Naismith. He was a moany git as player and maybe his style of communication was putting them off. He also had a few wee goes at the previous regime and I think the players took that to heart a little. BUT I think he has won them over, and most of the support too*. We look and feel in a good place. *There will always be the a small Neilson/Naismith out section wanting something to go wrong. Just look at twitter at half time on Tuesday. Last spring was unnacceptable. Somebody needed to tell them straight. Edited January 26 by pettigrewsstylist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 3 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said: I disagree with you where you say it was two fingers up at the board, I think it was more he was fed up with fans complaining about why we dont attack the Old Firm and really go at them. So he thought he would try to be clever and attacking, but it failed miserably. Its what i thought pre match when lineup released. Shame if so, because it stank of not putting club first, and i expected better of RN in that regard. Edited January 26 by pettigrewsstylist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.