Jump to content

L. Brilliant

Gold Members
  • Posts

    1,244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by L. Brilliant

  1. 1 hour ago, Specky Ginger said:

    Without checking I'd say 92-93, but that was a 44 game season with 2 points for a win.

    It was, we won 25. In 94-95 it was 19.

    The earlier season obviously there was less incentive or necessity to push for a winner in drawn games, which obviously applied to opponents as much as to us and we did only lose 4 out of 44 - maybe only two or three prior to sealing the title. With 3 pts per win that would have been 90, pro rated to 36 games 73.6. 

    Not a fair comparison clearly  and if 3 pts per win I doubt we'd have had all the home draws v Stirling, Hamilton, clydebank etc. Did we beat clydebank at all that season? There's a coincidence there if you look hard enough at it!

  2. Could see a refined version of the 3 4 3 getting tried tomorrow. Tonight's result shouldn't really make a difference as all the preparation is still before that happens. Anyway something with McGill- Turner- Stanton-someone on the left. Not saying I want this exactly but I've got the luxury of not being responsible for it... not feeling much appetite for trying to grind out a 1-0 or a draw that does nothing for playoff confidence. 

    Still hope to see more game time for Matthews - reckon he only got taken off at ht on Tues because we were expecting to dominate the ball and that was fair enough. He wasn't at fault for that result - you can't shut down a good passing team on your own.

  3. If I'm really hunting for a positive from last night, the gung ho roll of the dice was actually a bit more sensible and effective that's it's been on previous occasions - ie, it wasn't just 'more bodies forward' but actually strategic enough to have numbers and width to let us switch from side to side properly and work it to the last third.

    It was a gamble and we could have been hit more decisively on the break, but we were obviously threatening and the subs (no one else would have picked) all made an impact. It's not a shape you could start a game with.

    First half was maybe the low point of the season, a terrible mess.

  4. On 07/04/2024 at 15:48, Marten said:

    Screenshot_20240407_153052_OneFootball.jpg

    Definitely very funny.  If Feyenoord had got going a bit earlier in the season it would be a decent title race.

     

    When they were at their lowest ebb and PSV beat them 10-0 there was no let up, surprised they didn't seem to really go for it.  Then again the highlights are short, maybe they did.

  5. Well we haven't just lost Millen's deliveries we've lost Connolly's threat cutting inside - no one overlapping means two opposing players up against him instead of one. 

    To be honest I'm not complaining about that because if the personnel situation was untenable, that's that. But we have lost a serious threat down the right and not really replaced it with anything. Long balls.

  6. If we're thinking about anything other than how to beat Ayr, we will not beat Ayr.

    I think this is quite a big test of the manager after what he did at the weekend. If we line up with something wacky then Ayr have enough to take advantage, as they showed on Friday when Airdrie had a fifteen minute wobble.

  7. 7 minutes ago, Heid_The_Baw said:

    This one is definitely on the manager.  

    It is. Putting Turner at 6 as the 'shield' in front of Brown was an absolute gift to United who could float it to Moult and even Watt all afternoon. 

    Honestly, for all the talk of United being rattled, they just kept it simple and kept their heads while we, especially the manager, beat ourselves with this eccentric (overthought?) starting XI. No hindsight required for that.

×
×
  • Create New...