Match Preview/Thread - Partick vs Morton (16th March)

[standman]

That’s on the manager today.

French in centre mid wasn’t working from the outset

[Brian Skelton]

There is no use punting balls up to Muirhead it was and never will work. He doesn't jump for balls his first touch is questionable. Dougie was going nuts with the whole team today. Bad day at the office we move on.

[HamCam]

That was grim and you have to say the majority of the blame lies with the manager. The same starting 11 and offering up French in centre mid was baffling. Nothing worked for us today. The players have been excellent over recent months but no-one aside from the subs get pass marks. We deserved nothing from this game. Going from famine to feast and back to famine again is a hard watch.

Edited March 16 by HamCam

[ChampTon]

I hate that lot right. I hate them. I don't consider them as a "rival" other than proximity and being in the same league. 

Their fanbase is obsessed with having got one over us today, their captain can't stop talking about us; we are literally in their heads rent free.

Their impending liquidation will be well celebrated, especially when they play in front of 3k in a "save us" friendly against arch-rivals and supporter-less Queens Park. 

[TONofmemories]

Bellend 

[Alibi]

Glad I missed that one. Sounds like an absolute clusterfuck.

[SassenachTon]

The most frustrating thing for me is the inconsistency. We were so solid against Hearts. But then, just a few days later - this.

[irnbru]

13 hours ago, Brian Skelton said:

There is no use punting balls up to Muirhead it was and never will work. He doesn't jump for balls his first touch is questionable. Dougie was going nuts with the whole team today. Bad day at the office we move on.

I feel a bit for him. It's not his game to get balls launched up to him and the little he did win he was basically flicking it on to himself. 

Also feel a bit for Power. Obviously could have done a lot better but our choice of passes was terrible and was constantly putting other players under pressure. Not an excuse but the pitch didn't help - hopefully the last we hear about Cappielow after seeing that. 

[Drew Busby's Moustache]

16 hours ago, TAFKAC said:

There are always some bizarre comments after defeats but I've never seen anything as bad as this.  You do realise that they will have been doing patterns of play for most of the week based on the team selection.  Or do you think they all turn up on Saturday to see which number shirt the manager will give them.

Sorry Dougie.

[LargsTON]

I hope this Welsh boy is the real deal.  

[LargsTON]

I've looked back to last season when we had another long unbeaten run and that run occurred before Oakley had even signed for us.  It's a grim stat with him missing from the team but there has to be more to it.  We're not a one man team and we've still the same core of players.  

Edited March 17 by LargsTON

[irnbru]

3 hours ago, LargsTON said:

I've looked back to last season when we had another long unbeaten run and that run occurred before Oakley had even signed for us.  It's a grim stat with him missing from the team but there has to be more to it.  We're not a one man team and we've still the same core of players.  

I don't think it's just Oakley. Wilson out means we can't play Crawford high up and we lose out in the middle too. I think we'd have been fine with one or the other but not both so it's a bit unlucky. 

We do need a bigger squad but Imrie is right when he says its very fine margins. I'd love us to have a bigger squad with cover for every position but, if we're realistic, we need to accept injuries to key players will hit us harder than other teams and the budget only goes so far. 

There's an argument that we should be able to adjust and use the squad but a more flexible squad more often than not means poorer quality in a player's best positions. I think I'd rather see better players that aren't as adaptable than players with less ability that are but that's basically what the choice is. The highs will be higher and the lows will be lower with what we have but the alternative is probably a bit boring. 

[Hej]

3 hours ago, LargsTON said:

I've looked back to last season when we had another long unbeaten run and that run occurred before Oakley had even signed for us.  It's a grim stat with him missing from the team but there has to be more to it.  We're not a one man team and we've still the same core of players.  

I'd say we're more of a one tactic team, than a one man team. Shell the ball up to the forward and play off him. It's more a problem with squad depth/Dougie's tactical flexibility than Oakley himself being out. No disrespect intended to him cos he's been brilliant obviously, but if we had someone in the same mold as back-up, even a haddy like that Todorov, we'd be doing better than this current patch of form. 

[LargsTON]

6 minutes ago, Hej said:

I'd say we're more of a one tactic team, than a one man team. Shell the ball up to the forward and play off him. It's more a problem with squad depth/Dougie's tactical flexibility than Oakley himself being out. No disrespect intended to him cos he's been brilliant obviously, but if we had someone in the same mold as back-up, even a haddy like that Todorov, we'd be doing better than this current patch of form. 

That's a fair point actually.   Last season we could mix it up a bit as we had a few more attacking options out wide, notably a fitter Quitongo and Calvin Miller.  This season we've the likes of Bearne and McGrattan being used sparingly as Dougie seems reluctant to deviate from the norm.  Which is understandable to a degree considering our run of form.

[DaftTon74]

Not been many times in the last 2 and a bit years that we can say the manager got it wrong. However, that was on Imrie today I feel. If the change pays off it’s absolute genius, however like someone has already mentioned it’s usually a car crash and was. French’ distribution  is woeful at the best of times never mind as a central midfielder. Gillespie was also anonymous & Crawford was totally wasted out left. 
 

Thought Partick gave us a bit of a skelping in the first half and we improved a bit in the second. Do agree with Imrie in the sense that big chances change games. Blues has a good one first half, Muirhead and blues in the second half. The one I lost my head at was Mcgrattan at the back post from the cross into the box. He’s got to be absolutely screaming for that.

[Mr.Blue]

47 minutes ago, irnbru said:

I don't think it's just Oakley. Wilson out means we can't play Crawford high up and we lose out in the middle too. I think we'd have been fine with one or the other but not both so it's a bit unlucky. 

We do need a bigger squad but Imrie is right when he says its very fine margins. I'd love us to have a bigger squad with cover for every position but, if we're realistic, we need to accept injuries to keythis players will hit us harder than other teams and the budget only goes so far. 

There's an argument that we should be able to adjust and use the squad but a more flexible squad more often than not means poorer quality in a player's best positions. I think I'd rather see better players that aren't as adaptable than players with less ability that are but that's basically what the choice is. The highs will be higher and the lows will be lower with what we have but the alternative is probably a bit boring. 

This is a good point re Crawford. I'm one of his biggest fans but lately I think he's been poor and not had much of an impact with the ball. Workrate cannot be questioned but I'd like to see him be more effective - going back to last season form when he was contributing with goals and assists.

[SpoonTon]

Wilson had been our best midfielder over our good run. We've lost our main point of connection in attack (Oakley) and in midfield (Wilson). Probably our best two players this season. 

And losing those players has had a knock on effect on the roles of Muirhead, Crawford, and Blues - taking them away some of their strengths. 

We've also got players playing who are not fully fit. I'm not surprised that we've struggled to adapt, but I'm confident that it'll turn around soon. 

[dunning1874]

1 hour ago, LargsTON said:

That's a fair point actually.   Last season we could mix it up a bit as we had a few more attacking options out wide, notably a fitter Quitongo and Calvin Miller.  This season we've the likes of Bearne and McGrattan being used sparingly as Dougie seems reluctant to deviate from the norm.  Which is understandable to a degree considering our run of form.

That pre-Oakley unbeaten run last season we were very reliant on natural width with Quitongo on the right and McGrattan or Kabia on the left, with the long balls primarily aimed at finding the feet of wingers rather than going for Muirhead's head and trying to play off flick ons.

I can understand why Imrie has stuck with things like Blues on the right when he was in fantastic form there until a few games ago, but in Oakley's absence we need that natural width back to give us an outball. Having naturally central players there is fine when we're scrapping for second balls in a congested middle of the park and you want whoever's playing out wide to be comfortable stepping inside, but with no target man to aim at we need players who are comfortable opening up space by hugging the touchline, linking up with Strapp and French and carrying us up the park by running at full backs.

Garrity has to start next week.

[irnbru]

43 minutes ago, dunning1874 said:

That pre-Oakley unbeaten run last season we were very reliant on natural width with Quitongo on the right and McGrattan or Kabia on the left, with the long balls primarily aimed at finding the feet of wingers rather than going for Muirhead's head and trying to play off flick ons.

I can understand why Imrie has stuck with things like Blues on the right when he was in fantastic form there until a few games ago, but in Oakley's absence we need that natural width back to give us an outball. Having naturally central players there is fine when we're scrapping for second balls in a congested middle of the park and you want whoever's playing out wide to be comfortable stepping inside, but with no target man to aim at we need players who are comfortable opening up space by hugging the touchline, linking up with Strapp and French and carrying us up the park by running at full backs.

Garrity has to start next week.

Agreed. We are good when the full squad plays but pressure on the wings and runners central and out there causes problems. We are pretty flat without it. 

[TopCat]

13 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

That pre-Oakley unbeaten run last season we were very reliant on natural width with Quitongo on the right and McGrattan or Kabia on the left, with the long balls primarily aimed at finding the feet of wingers rather than going for Muirhead's head and trying to play off flick ons.

I can understand why Imrie has stuck with things like Blues on the right when he was in fantastic form there until a few games ago, but in Oakley's absence we need that natural width back to give us an outball. Having naturally central players there is fine when we're scrapping for second balls in a congested middle of the park and you want whoever's playing out wide to be comfortable stepping inside, but with no target man to aim at we need players who are comfortable opening up space by hugging the touchline, linking up with Strapp and French and carrying us up the park by running at full backs.

Garrity has to start next week.

Completely agree with this. Oakley often occupies 2 centre backs on his own, keeping the opposition defence pinned back all the time. Without Oakley and any ball-carrying or out-ball threat from our wide players, teams are coming to Cappielow and playing their fullbacks really high up the park to get the better of us in midfield. 

Blues and Muirhead have been excellent recently but it's time for a tweak to the gameplan.