.jpg.6b79302a80d314b19744ee96cf8bedf2.jpg)
Drooper
-
Posts
2,541 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Drooper
-
-
Just now, Hendo said:
And sadly, an inability to beat a lowland league side as things stand.
Fair shout.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:
St Mirren could easily offer something that’d get a deal done.
A club with heritage, credibility, and a decent fan base?
0 -
1 minute ago, FTOF said:
What is worrying?
I'm guessing the climate catastrophe?
6 -
Perhaps I'm reading too much into the goal/assist stats. They don't tell the whole story, but if it were to be a 4 month loan deal as has been suggested, I do wonder what kind of impact he could have.
1 -
That would be something of an anticlimax.
https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/how-has-uche-ikpeazu-been-getting-on-since-leaving-middlesbrough/
0 -
4-0.
The treble is on!
2 -
1 minute ago, ZingaliMan said:
Is McMenamin injured ?
Yes, picked up a niggle on the hideous plastic pitch in Montrose. Not too serious, however.
1 -
2 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:
There's a lot more things in life to be anxious about than losing our wing back no matter how good he is. Players come and players go. If I had a pound for every time over the decades I've read if player X leaves we are screwed I would have bought the club.
No player cannot be replaced at this level and if he left it would be for (relatively) good money. I'm sure clubs have contingency plans for exactly that sort of situation. If he goes, he goes, we just bring in the next potential Strain.
I'm not lying awake at night wringing hands and gnashing my teeth!
2 -
With the caveat that it was a friendly, everything productive the team exhibited against Dumbarton a couple of weeks back was through Strain.
I'm becoming increasingly anxious at the prospect of losing him late in the window. Yes, we might get a reasonable fee, but I would doubt we could use it to replace him with a player who possesses his attributes (and is generally very consistent). The later he went, the harder it would be to source a replacement before the window shuts.
Unless Strain is champing at the bit to get a shot at a bigger club (which would be entirely reasonable, in all fairness), I hope the club is asking for a prohibitive sum for him. He is our best player and most prized asset by some distance.
6 -
11 minutes ago, Munoz said:
How soon is now ?
Who knows, but I can confirm that the Queen is most definitely dead.
4 -
I recall the minor outcry when Carson signed. Apparently he was a significant downgrade in Alnwick, who was a significant downgrade on Hladky.
Let's give Hemming a chance, FFS!
10 -
5 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:
Obviously there's the crucial difference here that a lot of your squad are actually good, but if you sign Pressley that seems to be Alex Rae levels of imbalanced squad building on Robinson's part.
Even accounting for Ayunga's injury, which is charitable since it's not like he's out for the season, you've got Mandron, Grieve, Jamieson, Offord and Olusanya who can play at centre foward, with McMenamin and Kiltie to accommodate out wide or off a striker as well. While it's all well and good to argue that Olusanya can play out wide too so might be used there instead/is mince so might be moved on, and Offord or Jamieson could be loaned out again rather than being properly considered part of the first team, why bother signing Mandron if there was a chance of Pressley when you already have this number of attacking players to accommodate? When you're light on defenders as well that's pretty wild.
We need a left back, and a goalkeeper.
That's it, really.
Gogic can play in central defence, as can Fraser (at a push). With Taylor, Dunne, and Gallagher, we have central defensive options.
The left of defence is a concern, yes, but we must assume the manager is aware of this.
I'm not really sure where the suggestion that we are wildly imbalanced is coming from.
0 -
Robinson must stay!
4 -
1 minute ago, craigkillie said:
What's the difference? How is the Premiership season starting during the window different to the League Cup starting during the window?Clubs have had to play in Europe at this time of year for ages - does that devalue those competitions too?
Clubs will typically be more ready to embark on a campaign in August as that has been the traditional season KO. Introducing a national cup competition when the major squad building process is underway is a very different scenario.
1 -
8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:
There's not really such a thing as a "squad for the season", given that clubs sign players right up to the deadline in August (and sometimes after), and then again in January. There are also usually about 4 league games played before the end of the transfer window - does that mean the Premiership is devalued too?Contracts typically expire at the end of a season and the close/pre-season is when there is the greatest churn.
0 -
In terms of the mystery forward, my money is on a name that hasn't been mentioned and few of us have even heard of.
1 -
19 minutes ago, Captain_Sensible said:
Nothing like Dargo at all
When we signed Dargo he was 2 years younger than Moult is now and had just completed the 2 best seasons in his career in terms of both scoring goals and being injury free.
Moult hasn’t done anything for 5 years now.
Our problem with Dargo is that he promptly got injured in pre season straight after signing for us and was never able to replicate his ICT form for us
Dargo gets singled out for treatment (nae pun intended) in terms if his injury record, but no-one was more frustrated about that than the player himself.
1 -
17 minutes ago, Torfason said:
I have no issue with the format, just the timing of the start of the competition.
The summer is traditionally when clubs do the majority of their transfer business and to have a major cup competition start on July 15th when clubs are still trying to recruit and get fitness is unhelpful.
100% this.
0 -
Anyway, Louis Moult....
FFS!
0 -
6 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said:
I don''t understand the logic here.
In that case, it wouldn't be a level playing field if a team saigned a player in January window only to play him in a Scottish Cup game. Said team would have a distinct unfair advanytage then.
Montrose, Spartans and Stenhousemuir had the exact same date as we did for the beginning of the cup competition. The defeat lies squarely on us. Not on the format or anything being unfair.
I'm not talking about our defeat at the weekend. Yes, that lies squarely with us. Of course it does.
What I am saying is that I think one of our two national Cup competitions is devalued on account of clubs (all or any) being expected to play without their squads for the season being in place.
The argument that injuries and suspensions are an equivalence is specious. That is a depleted squad on account of the natural course of events in a season, but still technically a full squad.
1 -
26 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:
I am sorry but this seems like a logical fail.
You admit everyone is affected by need to rebuild but then say that's "not a level playing field".
It is a level playing field.
All the teams in the group stages needed to be ready to compete by 15 July 2023. That's a requirement which applied to all, and couldn't BE more of a "level playing field".
I don't know whether you mean, instead, that it's more "level" if it's later on so we are ready to thrash lower league opposition but, if we weren't as ready as we should have been v Montrose, that's our problem. But that sounds perilously close to demanding that a competition is bent to our needs and a wee bit entitled.
Nope.
It isn't a level playing field.
Team A might have made all their signing while Team B are still in the process (or waiting for clearance, etc).
A level playing field in a cup competition would be all clubs having their full squads in place (regardless of league placing).
Effectively, what you are suggesting is that the preseason only runs to the middle of July?
0 -
13 minutes ago, houston_bud said:
I can see the argument about the format devaluing the competition. Im not sure I completely agree but it's an interesting point.
I wonder what the smaller clubs think of the format. Take Spartans or Elgin (or indeed Montrose) they got a game against a bigger side where they could test themselves, and they saw a much bigger crowd than would've been there had it been a friendly. This would've brought in a nice wee sum for them. The Spartans might just have had their biggest home crowd of the season.
Should we get rid of this format? Maybe but there might be a lot of teams down the ladder that benefit from it.
I think that's a decent counter position. Horses for courses, etc.
0 -
18 minutes ago, Div said:
I think it's been done with good intentions, but it is quite hard on the players to be back playing competitive football already.
It's also quite hard on teams who are going through a squad rebuilding process and I think that's certainly the case with the likes of Dundee Utd who had an even worse result than we did at the weekend.
With us I'm not so sure that's a valid excuse though. We started with 8 players on the pitch who played regularly last season and should have been far better than we were. I don't think we have too many excuses for turning in such a lacklustre and disjointed display.
For me the most alarming thing was that there didn't really seem to be any sort of game plan whatsoever other than give the ball to Dec or Chilli D then fucking hoof it up the park. We should be better than that. We are better than that!
I agree that it isn't an excuse. I don't think anyone is suggesting that, tbf.
0 -
15 minutes ago, medals said:
So we cannot beat Morton and Montrose and its a cup format issue?
Whatever their preseason set up is, it works better than ours.
We need to be more professional and that means having players fitter than they obviously have been so far for the 2nd year running.
At our level we need to have real depth in the squad at the start of every new season - even though we still have others to bring in.
I get assessing the younger lads but Motherwell had 4 of those in their 1st competitive match and still managed a comfortable win.
If its broke, and it is, it needs to be fixed.
Where did I suggest our failure to defeat Morton or Montrose is a format issue.
There are two separate issues here. The LC format, and the team's recent performances. The fundamental point being made is that ALL clubs are still in the process of building for the season so there is no level playing field. This diminishes the competition.
None of that is an excuse for abysmal showings in matches we should be winning regardless.
0
The St. Mirren FC 2023/24 thread
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted
I recall a scene equally unedifying in Dumbarton a few years ago when Ian Murray was subject to horrific vitriol from many St Mirren supporters as he crossed the pitch at the end of a match. It was embarrassing.