Challenge Cup 2025-26

[Chicken_Soup]

1 hour ago, vikingTON said:

Yes it was, because:

i) bottom of League 2 dross is an entirely reasonable test for a backup. As are Scottish conditions - it's not as if Parklea was consistently tranquil last season, and

ii) Storer was linked just last week with a change of club/loan in the January transfer window. So we need to know whether we could play our current no.2 for a game, possibly two, at Championship level - if we are required to find the best available replacement for Storer.

The alternative is that we need to act first to secure a goalkeeper - even a pretty mediocre Championship level option - as insurance in case Storer leaves. There are costs to that decision, but there are also costs to shipping goals in key games in January. 

Only by playing Murdoch again do we get the hard evidence to show that he's still* not ready yet and so we need to be the first mover in the transfer market for a keeper - again if there is any substance to a potential move for Storer. 

 

 

* i.e. Any progression on the training ground, working with the defence since the summer is not enough to rely on. 

We already knew all of that. Not only have we learned nothing, we’re now out the cup.
 

If only we’d used Storer while he was here to get us to the next round, where the prize money could mitigate those additional costs…
 

It’s all fine though, and shipping goals in key games in January will be fine too, because we’ll learn something about our shortcomings along the way.

[Greacen2000]

1 hour ago, vikingTON said:

Yes it was, because:

i) bottom of League 2 dross is an entirely reasonable test for a backup. As are Scottish conditions - it's not as if Parklea was consistently tranquil last season, and

ii) Storer was linked just last week with a change of club/loan in the January transfer window. So we need to know whether we could play our current no.2 for a game, possibly two, at Championship level - if we are required to find the best available replacement for Storer.

The alternative is that we need to act first to secure a goalkeeper - even a pretty mediocre Championship level option - as insurance in case Storer leaves. There are costs to that decision, but there are also costs to shipping goals in key games in January. 

Only by playing Murdoch again do we get the hard evidence to show that he's still* not ready yet and so we need to be the first mover in the transfer market for a keeper - again if there is any substance to a potential move for Storer. 

 

 

* i.e. Any progression on the training ground, working with the defence since the summer is not enough to rely on. 

why not test him out with the better, more experienced defence who he will actually be playing with if Storer leaves?  Putting a back up player in to see how they fare in our starting XI - fair enough.  Throwing in an 18yo rookie keeper with a pair of centre backs in front of him who have been nowhere near our first team for most of the season - maybe not so much.

The 2 goals were undoubtedly howlers from Murdoch, but that in itself does not prove that he isn't good enough to be a Morton player.  Many good keepers have had similar howlers.  Murdoch gave a good account of himself in the spell he played last season, which I would say carries more weight than what happened on tuesday.

If Storer leaves, we would 100% need to bring in another keeper anyway - regardless of how ready or otherwise Murdoch is.  So what exactly did we learn from tuesday?

[Ferguson]

If we end up in another situation where Murdoch is starting in the league it’ll be a major balls up from the management. 4 goals conceded in 2 games against League 2 teams this season, 3 of which were his own howlers. Taking that chance in the league is only detrimental to the team and Sam himself who needs far more time to develop. 

I’d be more surprised if Storer stays beyond January, Ryan Mullen on loan would make a lot of sense seeing as he hasn’t played a minute in the league. 

[dunning1874]

I think the argument with Murdoch is different from Corr & Hart, because there was actually something to learn about Murdoch. Where Corr & Hart should be moved on in January and everyone already knew this, it's good to know that Murdoch needs a loan to get some experience at a decent level rather than being ready to be second choice and step in if Storer's unavailable.

It's why I was happy going into the League Cup with him as first choice (though that was also based on expecting the obviously not good enough Woods to still be here as well), find out if he's good enough to maintain the solid performances he had last season when there was time to sign an upgrade. That was answered quickly enough with the Peterhead game followed by Storer then being an excellent signing.

Personally I'd rather have had the strongest team possible on the park anyway, but I can at least see the argument that's there's a benefit to both the club and Murdoch himself in playing him, where one doesn't exist for Corr or Hart.

[vikingTON]

On 12/11/2025 at 10:04 AM, Chicken_Soup said:

We already knew all of that. Not only have we learned nothing, we’re now out the cup.

We didn't know anything about Murdoch's development since August, because he had not played a single minute of competitive football. And now we do. 

So your complaint is factually wrong. 

'The cup' is doing a hilarious amount of heavy lifting here, when we are very much still in the cup. And only under exceptional circumstances should Murdoch now play in the cup against Stenny - we now know that a replacement keeper is needed before any departure of Storer (not after). 

Edited December 12, 2025 by vikingTON

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:

why not test him out with the better, more experienced defence who he will actually be playing with if Storer leaves?  Putting a back up player in to see how they fare in our starting XI - fair enough.  Throwing in an 18yo rookie keeper with a pair of centre backs in front of him who have been nowhere near our first team for most of the season - maybe not so much.

The 2 goals were undoubtedly howlers from Murdoch, but that in itself does not prove that he isn't good enough to be a Morton player.  Many good keepers have had similar howlers.  Murdoch gave a good account of himself in the spell he played last season, which I would say carries more weight than what happened on tuesday.

If Storer leaves, we would 100% need to bring in another keeper anyway - regardless of how ready or otherwise Murdoch is.  So what exactly did we learn from tuesday?

Murdoch was poor in the League Cup and again the other night. He's at the beginning of his career so I'm not writing him off, but these excuses about not having the right defenders to work with, or the weather conditions, are deeply patronising. 

I've little doubt that Murdoch considers himself capable of playing well against Stirling fucking Albion. And any poor performance on the night was only matched by the failures of more senior (and higher paid) players to score a single goal in the entire second half between them. Which is something that the hysterical outrage about team selection continues to overlook. 

Edited December 11, 2025 by vikingTON

[HamCam]

A dreadful performance and sadly typical of Morton in this cup. It is easy with hindsight to criticise team selection but given the opposition we should have been more than capable of coping. The fault for me rests with the players - they never performed on the night.

[Greacen2000]

36 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

Murdoch was poor in the League Cup and again the other night. He's at the beginning of his career so I'm not writing him off, but these excuses about not having the right defenders to work with, or the weather conditions, are deeply patronising. 

I've little doubt that Murdoch considers himself capable of playing well against Stirling fucking Albion. And any poor performance on the night was only matched by the failures of more senior (and higher paid) players to score a single goal in the entire second half between them. Which is something that the hysterical outrage about team selection continues to overlook. 

fair enough.  I'm not trying to make excuses for his performance or anything - neither of his howlers were directly caused by the defenders in front of him.  My point was just that if you are giving someone a run out to see if they can step up when required, maybe best to do it in isolation rather than while making wholesale changes to the players around them at the same time.

Absolutely point taken regards to the failures of more experienced players.  Based on what I saw in the highlights, if we had taken our chances it could have been a very comfortable victory and we would all be saying how it was good to see fringe players get some game time.

[SpoonTon]

Corr had a nightmare against St Johnstone, but didn't disgrace himself in the lead up to that match (without ever troubling a long term starting place). He should have been able to handle Stirling, and it was really silly mistakes he made. In any case, we could have still gone through with his limitations. 

Given what we saw up at Peterhead and what we saw in Tuesday night, I don't think we needed to see Murdoch in a first team match to know how good he is or isn't. Connolly's working with him and should know enough without throwing him in for a cup match. This isn't a case where we've got two capable first team goalkeepers and the other needs cup games to keep him happy. As I said in the summer, he's very, very young for a goalkeeper and should be out at a relevant level getting experience in a weekly basis. 

Edited December 14, 2025 by SpoonTon

[Roger McQueen]

Two points from me would be, we should not be losing to a team struggling in the bottom tier and we should be trying to win this trophy from a financial and feel good boost. 

We have struggled v Peterhead, put out v Stirling and have Stenny to come who, in my opinion, are far better than Peterhead and Stirling so it could be another slog.