Morton vs Stenny Scottish Cup

[Greacen2000]

I had a bad feeling about this one and wasn’t at all surprised to see us lose, but to lose 4-0 is absolutely shocking, albeit the scoreline was a bit of a freak for me and definitely flattered stenny.

I still think that some of the reactions have been a bit over the top - the new managers only been in the door a couple of weeks and we have been shite all season with a bloated and imbalanced squad so it’s a bit much to blame it all on him. Players don’t suddenly forget how to defend corners because they haven’t been coached properly on it for 2 weeks.

I actually thought the post match interview was refreshingly honest.  I have no issue with him saying we need to strengthen, and I thought he was right to call out the players while stopping short of throwing anyone under the bus.  Now he has to do what he said in terms of going back to basics and making us harder to beat.

I know this shouldn’t really factor into how I feel about the defeat but I must say that the next round draw has softened the blow for me quite a lot.  A tie at home to Falkirk* would have all but guaranteed a humiliating exit at the next round anyway while offering little in the way of being a big earner so at least we haven’t missed out on a big money spinner or an easy tie against an Elgin/Kelty/Spartans(not that we can assume any of them would have been easy on the strength of Saturdays showing)

* Jamie rightly pointed out that we would have been ball 9 in the draw, so wouldn’t have got the same draw as Stenny did - we would have been away to Dunfermline which is still a shite draw

Edited January 19 by Greacen2000

[Jamie_M]

21 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:

I know this shouldn’t really factor into how I feel about the defeat but I must say that the next round draw has softened the blow for me quite a lot.  A tie at home to Falkirk would have all but guaranteed a humiliating exit at the next round anyway while offering little in the way of being a big earner so at least we haven’t missed out on a big money spinner or an easy tie against an Elgin/Kelty/Spartans(not that we can assume any of them would have been easy on the strength of Saturdays showing)

We wouldn't have been drawn at Home against Falkirk - we would have been drawn away at Dunfermline.

[Greacen2000]

26 minutes ago, Jamie_M said:

We wouldn't have been drawn at Home against Falkirk - we would have been drawn away at Dunfermline.

Ok is that something to do with the ball numbers being allocated based on seeding or alphabetical order?  Fair enough I hadn’t factored that in, but my point still stands for an away tie at Dunfermline (albeit maybe with a very slightly higher chance of progressing than we would have against Falkirk) - it would have been another shite draw

Edited January 19 by Greacen2000

[Jamie_M]

44 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:

Ok is that something to do with the ball numbers being allocated based on seeding or alphabetical order?  Fair enough I hadn’t factored that in, but my point still stands for an away tie at Dunfermline (albeit maybe with a very slightly higher chance of progressing than we would have against Falkirk) - it would have been another shite draw

Alphabetical.

[HamCam]

Watch the highlights and please explain how Murray is in anyway to blame for players switching off. Our limited resources at centre back meant we had limited options for substitutions. Wilson and Shaw may offer more height than most of our sand dancing midgets but they are not known for being great in the air. The true test for Murray is what happens next.

[SpoonTon]

As best I can see from highlights/remember:

Storer is rooted to his line at the first goal, and Moore is the wrong side of everything. Comrie is beaten to the ball for the second (maybe Storer could've anticipated it and got a fist to it but that would've been excellent goalkeeping). At the third both Longridge and Wilson are beaten to the ball. The fourth is a punt and a mess of Longridge bowling into others who have forgotten what defending is. 

There's no doubting that defenders weren't doing their job very well. Whether the instructions were muddled on marking and that didn't help, I don't know. If you look back at the Peterhead game, we were the same in the box and easily could've conceded more from very little that day. It could perhaps be the case that the messaging and work on how we defend set pieces needs to be stronger, because it's not like we have guys like Jack Baird who have other weaknesses but this is their bread and butter, so to speak. 

ETA: I can see from the other angle that Longridge is just beaten to it for the first goal as well. He's had a real shocker. 

Edited January 19 by SpoonTon

[DaftTon74]

I believe that we have now conceded 9 goals this season from corners and direct free kicks:

1x Aberdeen, x2 Ayr, x1 St J, x1 Peterhead, x1 Airdrie, x3 Stenny.

May be 9 from set plays but we have conceded a whole lot more from crosses into the box and failing to win the first header or simply following runners. Samuel at home v Partick, Gilmour away at Dunfermline coming to mind of the top of my head. This team have a complete inability to defend their own box and it has been an issue all season.

Now that is either down to 4 managers failing to identify our weaknesses or the most plausible case that we have a major personnel issue and the players we have are simply not good enough to carry out basic defensive duties. 

 

 

[Drew Busby's Moustache]

4 hours ago, SpoonTon said:

As best I can see from highlights/remember:

Storer is rooted to his line at the first goal, and Moore is the wrong side of everything. Comrie is beaten to the ball for the second (maybe Storer could've anticipated it and got a fist to it but that would've been excellent goalkeeping). At the third both Longridge and Wilson are beaten to the ball. The fourth is a punt and a mess of Longridge bowling into others who have forgotten what defending is. 

There's no doubting that defenders weren't doing their job very well. Whether the instructions were muddled on marking and that didn't help, I don't know. If you look back at the Peterhead game, we were the same in the box and easily could've conceded more from very little that day. It could perhaps be the case that the messaging and work on how we defend set pieces needs to be stronger, because it's not like we have guys like Jack Baird who have other weaknesses but this is their bread and butter, so to speak. 

ETA: I can see from the other angle that Longridge is just beaten to it for the first goal as well. He's had a real shocker. 

Had we managed to retain Baird and Boyes we would not be in this situation.

[Brian Skelton]

That defending is so bad it is laughable hopefully Murray can get a couple of decent defenders and forwards in and maybe get  couple of those charlatans out on loan.

Edited January 19 by Brian Skelton

[James]

For all it’s right to examine defence of the set plays, you can’t forget the way in which some of them were given away.

For the third, Wilson had plenty of time to move the baw and then when he eventually comes under the first bit of pressure he turns back, takes a bad touch and is too slow to recover. It was dreadful: a microcosm of the failings of this squad, and another example of that particular player’s regression over the past 18 months.

Edited January 19 by James

[vikingTON]

8 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:

I still think that some of the reactions have been a bit over the top - the new managers only been in the door a couple of weeks and we have been shite all season with a bloated and imbalanced squad so it’s a bit much to blame it all on him.

Who, exactly, blamed it all on the manager?

What is actually happening is an attempt to blame none of it on the manager, with a litany of excuses about the awful squad, about lack of player availability (no Dylan Corr or Sonny Hart!), and about not having 'enough' time to train a full time professional outfit to execute an absolutely critical, basic task for a cup tie against lower league opposition.

And the acid test for such excuses is as follows: what would the response have been, had Davies been 'overseeing' the interim coaches for one of the most humiliating results in the club's history? He would have been eviscerated on here both as a coach and no doubt for his personal foibles as well - despite all of the same arguments about the squad applying. 

Wanting the manager to do well is understandable. Being driven by that urge to apply such obvious double standards and deflection from the stark facts of Saturday's result and manner of defeat - in which there is plenty of blame to share by everyone involved - is not rational.

Just like with Laird's departure, it is all too convenient and easy and wrong to just start a new slate and insist that all blame rests with those heading out the door. 

Edited January 19 by vikingTON

[SpoonTon]

23 minutes ago, James said:

For all it’s right to examine defence of the set plays, you can’t forget the way in which some of them were given away.

For the third, Wilson had plenty of time to move the baw and then when he eventually comes under the first bit of pressure he turns back, takes a bad touch and is too slow to recover. It was dreadful: a microcosm of the failings of this squad, and another example of that particular player’s regression over the past 18 months.

Wilson's overall contribution to the third goal was a horror show. I don't know if there's injury or fitness issues there but he's been a long, long way from his best this season. He's been getting about and covering the space but seems like he's struggling with the aspects of the game related to power (winning the ball in challenges, moving away from opposition players quickly, etc.). 

[Rossco]

1 hour ago, SpoonTon said:

Wilson's overall contribution to the third goal was a horror show. I don't know if there's injury or fitness issues there but he's been a long, long way from his best this season. He's been getting about and covering the space but seems like he's struggling with the aspects of the game related to power (winning the ball in challenges, moving away from opposition players quickly, etc.). 

Being doing it all season but is the darling of the support so gets away with it. He even got agitated at the shed one day when with nobody on him he chose to turn and ball ended up back with the keeper.

 

He is such a frustrating player to watch as he has bags of ability but is too negative on the ball and non existent off the ball.

[Mr.Blue]

2 hours ago, SpoonTon said:

Wilson's overall contribution to the third goal was a horror show. I don't know if there's injury or fitness issues there but he's been a long, long way from his best this season. He's been getting about and covering the space but seems like he's struggling with the aspects of the game related to power (winning the ball in challenges, moving away from opposition players quickly, etc.). 

Yeah Wilson has been guilty of losing possession a lot in midfield this season. Caused goals against Stirling in the cup and I'm sure against Partick as well. He's been a real disappointment this season.

[Greacen2000]

3 hours ago, vikingTON said:

Who, exactly, blamed it all on the manager?

What is actually happening is an attempt to blame none of it on the manager, with a litany of excuses about the awful squad, about lack of player availability (no Dylan Corr or Sonny Hart!), and about not having 'enough' time to train a full time professional outfit to execute an absolutely critical, basic task for a cup tie against lower league opposition.

And the acid test for such excuses is as follows: what would the response have been, had Davies been 'overseeing' the interim coaches for one of the most humiliating results in the club's history? He would have been eviscerated on here both as a coach and no doubt for his personal foibles as well - despite all of the same arguments about the squad applying. 

Wanting the manager to do well is understandable. Being driven by that urge to apply such obvious double standards and deflection from the stark facts of Saturday's result and manner of defeat - in which there is plenty of blame to share by everyone involved - is not rational.

Just like with Laird's departure, it is all too convenient and easy and wrong to just start a new slate and insist that all blame rests with those heading out the door. 

I didn’t see anything in the game to suggest that the poor defending was down to bad organisation or coaching - the players were where I would expect them to be but they didn’t do their job.

I also haven’t seen anyone trying to completely absolve Murray from responsibility.  We lost the game - the players and coaching staff are quite clearly responsible for that.

yes it was an embarrassing defeat, but we have no god given right to beat a team who are only 4 places below us based on current standings.  All this pish about “one of the worst results in the clubs history” etc etc is a prime example of the overreaction I am talking about.

[dunning1874]

15 hours ago, DaftTon74 said:

I believe that we have now conceded 9 goals this season from corners and direct free kicks:

1x Aberdeen, x2 Ayr, x1 St J, x1 Peterhead, x1 Airdrie, x3 Stenny.

May be 9 from set plays but we have conceded a whole lot more from crosses into the box and failing to win the first header or simply following runners. Samuel at home v Partick, Gilmour away at Dunfermline coming to mind of the top of my head. This team have a complete inability to defend their own box and it has been an issue all season.

Now that is either down to 4 managers failing to identify our weaknesses or the most plausible case that we have a major personnel issue and the players we have are simply not good enough to carry out basic defensive duties. 

 

 

So we'd conceded 6 in 28 games, but then conceding 3 in 1 somehow isn't a massive and alarming regression? It is evidently much worse than in any other game this season.

7 hours ago, Greacen2000 said:

yes it was an embarrassing defeat, but we have no god given right to beat a team who are only 4 places below us based on current standings.  All this pish about “one of the worst results in the clubs history” etc etc is a prime example of the overreaction I am talking about.

There is a massive difference between believing you a divine right to win a game and having an entirely reasonable expectation not to lose 4-0. I expected to lose and had it been 1-0 or 2-1, no one would be saying it was one of the worst results in our history. Losing in the manner we did is absolutely the worst result of the last decade at least, and one of the worst results ever.

[Ferguson]

10 hours ago, Rossco said:

Being doing it all season but is the darling of the support so gets away with it. He even got agitated at the shed one day when with nobody on him he chose to turn and ball ended up back with the keeper.

 

He is such a frustrating player to watch as he has bags of ability but is too negative on the ball and non existent off the ball.

This is the type of thing I’ll be judging Murray on over the rest of the season. Wilson is either an absolute dog in the middle or he’s timid and anonymous, unfortunately it’s been the latter all season. We need to be getting far more out of the players that we know have it in them.

[Greacen2000]

3 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

So we'd conceded 6 in 28 games, but then conceding 3 in 1 somehow isn't a massive and alarming regression? It is evidently much worse than in any other game this season.

I would probably give it a few more games before calling it a regression.  Maybe it’s sign of a regression, or maybe it’s a 1-off.  There have been plenty of games this season where we could have conceded more from these situations, but were saved by good goalkeeping or bad finishing so I’m not ready to call it a massive regression just yet.

 

3 hours ago, dunning1874 said:

There is a massive difference between believing you a divine right to win a game and having an entirely reasonable expectation not to lose 4-0. I expected to lose and had it been 1-0 or 2-1, no one would be saying it was one of the worst results in our history. Losing in the manner we did is absolutely the worst result of the last decade at least, and one of the worst results ever.

You won’t hear me calling this anything other than a monumentally awful result,  but i still think you are overreacting a bit.  It’s possible that some folk might have a bit of a cognitive bias here because it’s Stenhousemuir.  If we had went down by the same scoreline to Inverness, Queen of the south (and maybe even Hamilton!) then I doubt the reaction would have been as severe.

Arguably it isn’t even our worst result of this season - I would say that getting knocked out the challenge cup by a team who had just gone 8 games without a win in League 2 is objectively worst than getting knocked out by a team 4 places below us.  And before you say it’s about the scoreline rather than just the result - Stirling created more chances against us and we could easily have conceded more if it weren’t for some big saves (something that didn’t happen on Saturday unfortunately).

Edited January 20 by Greacen2000

[SpoonTon]

36 minutes ago, Greacen2000 said:

I would probably give it a few more games before calling it a regression.  Maybe it’s sign of a regression, or maybe it’s a 1-off.  There have been plenty of games this season where we could have conceded more from these situations, but were saved by good goalkeeping or bad finishing so I’m not ready to call it a massive regression just yet.

 

You won’t hear me calling this anything other than a monumentally awful result,  but i still think you are overreacting a bit.  It’s possible that some folk might have a bit of a cognitive bias here because it’s Stenhousemuir.  If we had went down by the same scoreline to Inverness, Queen of the south (and maybe even Hamilton!) then I doubt the reaction would have been as severe.

Arguably it isn’t even our worst result of this season - I would say that getting knocked out the challenge cup by a team who had just gone 8 games without a win in League 2 is objectively worst than getting knocked out by a team 4 places below us.  And before you say it’s about the scoreline rather than just the result - Stirling created more chances against us and we could easily have conceded more if it weren’t for Storer making some big saves (something that didn’t happen on Saturday unfortunately).

Storer didn't play against Stirling. 

I think cause it was penalties, the Challenge Cup, and deliberately not the strongest possible selection, that result isn't going to be seen as being as bad. 

[Greacen2000]

16 minutes ago, SpoonTon said:

Storer didn't play against Stirling. 

I think cause it was penalties, the Challenge Cup, and deliberately not the strongest possible selection, that result isn't going to be seen as being as bad. 

Sorry brain fart from me there.  Totally point taken re the significance of the competition & the nature of the defeat, but I would still say that purely on the basis of the performance, result & standard of opponent they are comparable.