Sons' sorrow

[Nowhereman]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

The bit in bold is where the defence of Duffy falls down for me. I'd need it explained to me why our budget would be any smaller than Montrose, yet for some reason Sons fans are supposed to like it or lump it when it comes to the team of unbalanced jobbers we've got. Duffy planned a 4-4-2 this year and then went about signing players who wholly don't suit playing in a 4-4-2. He tried to keep players we all knew weren't good enough, thankfully his derisory offers to them were outbid but Lowland League teams and they moved on. We have 6 loans available to use this year and we've used 2. In a season where you might not have the cash to sign quality players, I'm sure there are young guys at Premier clubs (or even Championship clubs) who would do us a job. 

For me this sums up Duffy though - he moved on Lewis Crawford in the summer. A guy I think every Sons fan wanted to succeed given his ties with the club but after some shaky starts (and a couple of decent performances) it was clear that he was maybe playing a bit above his level. No real harm, Duffy has realised the mistake and is now looking to fix it. Except he wasn't really looking to fix it. We went weeks without signing any full back cover this year. We had Donald Morrison on trial at the start of preseason but never offered him a deal. We got an injury for the Betfred (I think to Wardrop?) and Duffy had to sign some cover. He signed Morrison because it was easy. Morrison played against Falkirk and sadly he looks even less ready for senior football than Lewis Crawford. Duffy realises this and then goes about signing Daniel Church as full back cover, who was actually available all summer long and could've been signed instead of Morrison anyway. Church has filled gaps so far but again it doesn't look like he's even up to the standard of the league. We could've just saved a whole lot of bother and kept Lewis Crawford on if we didn't have any inclination to replace him with someone better. 

We've also signed up a first choice keeper with some injuries in his history, then signed up a 34 year old guy to support him whose knees lasted 60 minutes before ending up crocked. After bringing in another 30 year old from St Rochs on a short term loan (who Duffy inexplicably gave 45 minutes of for no reason), we then decided to bring in a local 16 year old boy to sit on the bench and desperately attempted to tart it up as some sort of community work. To be clear here, I think it's great that we're getting guys in from local clubs to train with us and I even agree we should make them part of the squad when we can but none of these kids should be next in the line of fire if we get an injury, they should be there as an unrequired supplement. Dabrowski has already injured himself warming up this season, not sure it's very responsible to throw in a 16 year old boys club player against a full time professional side away from home but that's where we're at.

That's a wee shift of the goalposts there, you asked who we would pick given the choice in the first instance and nobody has yet said Duffy should be sacked as we all realise that it would be suicide to pay him off and bring someone else in, with all the upheaval that brings squad wise.

Murray probably left at the right time with us in his first spell, and I agree that his style of football had regressed, but he's still a young manager with ambitions of winning things. Ian McCall, whilst not as young, is clearly a very driven and ambitious guy - he was a big driver behind Ayr going full time and establishing themselves in the second tier before leaving for a club he loves, where he again has ambitions of taking them higher. You can argue whether it was financially prudent of Ayr to do so, but nonetheless it shows the ambition the manager and club had. Duffy isn't any of those things. He accepts mediocrity, he rarely inspires you with signings or with his words and appears lazy in the extreme when it comes to signing players.

I'm not saying I want us to phone up Airdrie and swap managers, I'm just acknowledging that ours probably won't take us out of this league in either direction so it comes down to what you want to see the club do. This year I think most are happy to see us survive in this league and come out the other side without too much horrendous debt to deal with, but as I've said previously if the club want to keep fans onside then they'll need to start showing ambitions of getting into the second tier again. Duffy has to do a lot to convince me that he's the man to do that. 

Well for a start they have owners who take a vague interest in the club, like every other team in the division.

[The Moonster]

1 minute ago, Nowhereman said:

Well for a start they have owners who take a vague interest in the club, like every other team in the division.

Not buying it. Do their owners pile money into the budget every year or do they just use what they've got in the most effective way? I can't say looking at Montrose's team there are any players there that I feel should be beyond our budget. Much of their team was built in League 2 and it has been supplemented by good loans (see Harry Cochrane and Chris Mochrie) and shrewd steals from lower levels (see Blair Lyons) as they moved up. Montrose look to beat every side they play in this league, we park the bus. 

Not sure every other club in the division don't have ownership problems either. Don't East Fife still have Rankines girlfriends dug or something as a major shareholder? 

How did our sustained 6 years in the second tier happen if it was down to owners showing an interest? We looked after ourselves. Brabco don't help, but in terms of what we have as a sustainable budget they aren't a hinderance either. We want the club to spend what it takes in, so why are we looking for owners to pile in money and accrue debt?

We have one of the best sponsors we've had in years at the club just now, not only piling in money for the stadium, strips and a whole manner of other things but assisting players outside of football and doing excellent community work from the stadium. We have an active fanbase who have raised thousands of pounds for the club this year and would no doubt donate more tomorrow if they were asked to do so. We have a board of directors full of people who genuinely care for the club and only want to see it thrive. I just don't get why we're apparently worse off than every other club in the division. 

 

[FifeSons]

14 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Not buying it. Do their owners pile money into the budget every year or do they just use what they've got in the most effective way? I can't say looking at Montrose's team there are any players there that I feel should be beyond our budget. Much of their team was built in League 2 and it has been supplemented by good loans (see Harry Cochrane and Chris Mochrie) and shrewd steals from lower levels (see Blair Lyons) as they moved up. Montrose look to beat every side they play in this league, we park the bus. 

Not sure every other club in the division don't have ownership problems either. Don't East Fife still have Rankines girlfriends dug or something as a major shareholder? 

How did our sustained 6 years in the second tier happen if it was down to owners showing an interest? We looked after ourselves. Brabco don't help, but in terms of what we have as a sustainable budget they aren't a hinderance either. We want the club to spend what it takes in, so why are we looking for owners to pile in money and accrue debt?

We have one of the best sponsors we've had in years at the club just now, not only piling in money for the stadium, strips and a whole manner of other things but assisting players outside of football and doing excellent community work from the stadium. We have an active fanbase who have raised thousands of pounds for the club this year and would no doubt donate more tomorrow if they were asked to do so. We have a board of directors full of people who genuinely care for the club and only want to see it thrive. I just don't get why we're apparently worse off than every other club in the division. 

 

I'd be very surprised if a club like Montrose don't have a bigger budget than us. Lots of wealthy Tory backing in Angus and there's basically nothing else to do there other than football.

I would agree that Petrie will definitely be more proactive than Duffy with what he has though.

Edited December 7, 2020 by FifeSons

[O'Kelly Isley III]

I think at our level the budget obviously dictates what happens on the pitch to a large extent but we should never overlook the influence of the guy(s) in the dugout, and indeed the Boardroom.
Folk are making comparisons with Montrose and I see similarities with the Dumbarton team of the late 1960's; a club which had languished for years started to move with a supportive Board under Chairman Robert Robertson and an ambitious young Manager in Jackie Stewart.
Staying in this division will be ambitious enough for this season.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Pie and Bovril mobile app

[The Moonster]

21 minutes ago, FifeSons said:

I'd be very surprised if a club like Montrose don't have a bigger budget than us. Lots of wealthy Tory backing in Angus and there's basically nothing else to do there other than football.

I would agree that Petrie will definitely be more proactive than Duffy with what he has though.

In that case I assume they are recent backers considering Montrose spent about 3 decades in the bottom tier. Outside of their two loans in Cochrane and Mochrie I don't see who is commanding big wages there. 

[FifeSons]

11 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

In that case I assume they are recent backers considering Montrose spent about 3 decades in the bottom tier. Outside of their two loans in Cochrane and Mochrie I don't see who is commanding big wages there. 

Without wanting to turn this into the Montrose thread, they have had spells of relatively decent backing in the past, but wasted it. If you recall, when we dropped down to the Third Division with McCabe in charge, they had a new wealthy owner who splashed quite a bit of money on players (Baird, Rodgers etc) and upgraded the ground. No doubt their recent success is down to having a great manager, but I'm almost certain their budget will be bigger than ours.

Edited December 7, 2020 by FifeSons

[FifeSons]

There's no one in the league I'd actually say for certain that we have a bigger budget than.

[rockson]

8 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I'm not saying I want us to phone up Airdrie and swap managers, I'm just acknowledging that ours probably won't take us out of this league in either direction so it comes down to what you want to see the club do. This year I think most are happy to see us survive in this league and come out the other side without too much horrendous debt to deal with, but as I've said previously if the club want to keep fans onside then they'll need to start showing ambitions of getting into the second tier again. Duffy has to do a lot to convince me that he's the man to do that. 

I'd like us to do that but I'd take staying in this league for the foreseeable given everything that's against the club right now. If we get out of the Brabco thing as a going concern we'll be lucky. If we don't, then the third tier would look heavenly.

[rockson]

On 06/12/2020 at 20:28, FifeSons said:

Just read and enjoyed Jan’s piece with Flannery and Grindlay.

Grindlay being a bit harsh on himself to say he struggled with crosses and wasn’t a great shot stopper!

He did struggle with crosses, though. Not harsh there.

But he was a (very?) good shotstopper.

[The Moonster]

10 minutes ago, rockson said:

I'd like us to do that but I'd take staying in this league for the foreseeable given everything that's against the club right now. If we get out of the Brabco thing as a going concern we'll be lucky. If we don't, then the third tier would look heavenly.

I tend to agree. When I say "keep fans onside" I don't necessarily mean any fan on this board, we'll all likely be here no matter what league we're in, but if we want to encourage others who might not usually come down, or getting folk who come a few times a season to come every week, then we need a team worth watching on the pitch.

[cedrick1]

I agree with a lot of the comments about how we are to watch. 
if we attacked more it would be better to watch and I’m sure we’d get results a bit like the first Ian Murray season.

probjem is the players we have. Are they able to provide this.

let’s wait and see what the run of home games brings us in terms of both results and performance . Improvement in both needed 

 

[Jan Vojáček]

11 minutes ago, cedrick1 said:

I agree with a lot of the comments about how we are to watch. 
if we attacked more it would be better to watch and I’m sure we’d get results a bit like the first Ian Murray season.

probjem is the players we have. Are they able to provide this.

let’s wait and see what the run of home games brings us in terms of both results and performance . Improvement in both needed 

 

I might be in the minority here, but I think they are - yes.

Let's take it from the front to the back.

Up top we have Jaime Wilson. A tireless runner, a guy who's shown he can finish one-on-one, do the nasty stuff and certainly has a bit of skill in his locker. We then have Adam Frizzell and PJ Crossan, two not dissimilar young players who are quick, skilful, good on the ball and have an eye for a pass - but just need to work on the final ball. In Frizzell's case he needs to shoot more often, in PJ's he probably needs to pass more often.

Now there's no reason why the the three of them (either in a 4-3-3, a 4-4-1-1 or even a 4-4-2) can't be a threat at this level.

Dropping back into midfield, we have the gorgeous touch and control of Nat Wedderburn, Chris Hamilton who has shown himself to be tenacious but good on the ball and Carsy - who we all know is a nice passer and can keep play ticking over. We have Forbes too obviously, he has all the quality in the world - but hasn't really shown it since the Forfar game before lockdown. So lets take the three players I've mentioned instead. We lack a McKee/Agnew-esque player to make a killer forward pass or driving run - but again there is technical quality there. And again there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to form a good midfield out of what we have.

At full-back Sam Wardrop has looked far more like the player he was in his first loan spell, whilst Rico is solid - albeit not often a threat going forward. Which is fine. You don't want two full-backs bombing forwards.

The two centre-halves are solid defensively. No question. But what we lack (and have lacked since Craig Barr left) is a ball-playing centre-back. McGeever and Morgyn would probably agree that their strengths don't lie with the ball at their feet - and that's where we fall down massively imo. It was the same last season, and was something I remember posting on here.

That leaves us with plenty of the ball in deep positions where teams are happy to let us knock it about. But without a plan going forward. So they eventually launch it over the ball playing midfield and towards the technical - but small/isolated - strikeforce.

It sounds daft given we've been excellent defensively this season and very poor going forward. But I genuinely think if you slotted a ball-playing defender in there we'd notice a massive difference. 

Is it Duffy's fault we play the way we do? Is it the players? I've no idea. Unless we were in the changing room and at training during the week then there's no way of knowing. But something has to change. Because not playing good football and not scoring is a recipe for disaster. If you're playing good football the chances will come. If you're scoring goals but eye-bleeding to watch, you'll get results. We're stuck in the worst of both worlds.

[BallochSonsFan]

22 minutes ago, Jan Vojáček said:

I might be in the minority here, but I think they are - yes.

Let's take it from the front to the back.

Up top we have Jaime Wilson. A tireless runner, a guy who's shown he can finish one-on-one, do the nasty stuff and certainly has a bit of skill in his locker. We then have Adam Frizzell and PJ Crossan, two not dissimilar young players who are quick, skilful, good on the ball and have an eye for a pass - but just need to work on the final ball. In Frizzell's case he needs to shoot more often, in PJ's he probably needs to pass more often.

Now there's no reason why the the three of them (either in a 4-3-3, a 4-4-1-1 or even a 4-4-2) can't be a threat at this level.

Dropping back into midfield, we have the gorgeous touch and control of Nat Wedderburn, Chris Hamilton who has shown himself to be tenacious but good on the ball and Carsy - who we all know is a nice passer and can keep play ticking over. We have Forbes too obviously, he has all the quality in the world - but hasn't really shown it since the Forfar game before lockdown. So lets take the three players I've mentioned instead. We lack a McKee/Agnew-esque player to make a killer forward pass or driving run - but again there is technical quality there. And again there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to form a good midfield out of what we have.

At full-back Sam Wardrop has looked far more like the player he was in his first loan spell, whilst Rico is solid - albeit not often a threat going forward. Which is fine. You don't want two full-backs bombing forwards.

The two centre-halves are solid defensively. No question. But what we lack (and have lacked since Craig Barr left) is a ball-playing centre-back. McGeever and Morgyn would probably agree that their strengths don't lie with the ball at their feet - and that's where we fall down massively imo. It was the same last season, and was something I remember posting on here.

That leaves us with plenty of the ball in deep positions where teams are happy to let us knock it about. But without a plan going forward. So they eventually launch it over the ball playing midfield and towards the technical - but small/isolated - strikeforce.

It sounds daft given we've been excellent defensively this season and very poor going forward. But I genuinely think if you slotted a ball-playing defender in there we'd notice a massive difference. 

Is it Duffy's fault we play the way we do? Is it the players? I've no idea. Unless we were in the changing room and at training during the week then there's no way of knowing. But something has to change. Because not playing good football and not scoring is a recipe for disaster. If you're playing good football the chances will come. If you're scoring goals but eye-bleeding to watch, you'll get results. We're stuck in the worst of both worlds.

If fit and healthy I'd go for that 4-3-3 right now:

Dabrowski in goals.

Back 4 of Quitongo, Neil, McGeever and Wardrop.

Midfield 3 of Wedderburn, Carswell and Hamilton. You'd expect any of that 3 to be able to drop back and act as an aggressive sweeper or help out defensively in a back 5 if needed.

Front 3 of Wilson playing centrally and Crossan and Frizzell cutting inside to help as a 2nd forward when the play isnt going down their wing. The only concern is that neither would provide much cover for their fullbacks, but in a midfield 3 you've got scope for one of the midfielders to do that and the player on the other side of the 3 to move in a little and help the other central midfielder.

I'd still be expecting tough games against Falkirk, Cove and Thistle, but I'd give us a chance against anybody else in the league. The problem is depth outside of that. Jonhstone could come in up front, but is Robert Jones capable of being as effective as Robert Thompson was out wide for us (that 4-0 Raith game was immense)? Forbes offers little in midfield beyond set pieces and its a big ask for the others to carry him and cover his defending. McCluskey isnt really a wide man but could perhaps work as an inside forward or playing centrally.

The biggest issue for me is whether or not the manager would be willing to play a more open game. I'd also expect any of the teams in our division to have a go at us because outside of the top 3 I don't think there's a massive gap between the remaining 7 sides. But that's football. I'd rather see us go for a 3-2 win than grinding out a 0-0 in an utterly drab and depressing borefest.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

4 hours ago, Jan Vojáček said:

I might be in the minority here, but I think they are - yes.

Let's take it from the front to the back.

Up top we have Jaime Wilson. A tireless runner, a guy who's shown he can finish one-on-one, do the nasty stuff and certainly has a bit of skill in his locker. We then have Adam Frizzell and PJ Crossan, two not dissimilar young players who are quick, skilful, good on the ball and have an eye for a pass - but just need to work on the final ball. In Frizzell's case he needs to shoot more often, in PJ's he probably needs to pass more often.

Now there's no reason why the the three of them (either in a 4-3-3, a 4-4-1-1 or even a 4-4-2) can't be a threat at this level.

Dropping back into midfield, we have the gorgeous touch and control of Nat Wedderburn, Chris Hamilton who has shown himself to be tenacious but good on the ball and Carsy - who we all know is a nice passer and can keep play ticking over. We have Forbes too obviously, he has all the quality in the world - but hasn't really shown it since the Forfar game before lockdown. So lets take the three players I've mentioned instead. We lack a McKee/Agnew-esque player to make a killer forward pass or driving run - but again there is technical quality there. And again there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to form a good midfield out of what we have.

At full-back Sam Wardrop has looked far more like the player he was in his first loan spell, whilst Rico is solid - albeit not often a threat going forward. Which is fine. You don't want two full-backs bombing forwards.

The two centre-halves are solid defensively. No question. But what we lack (and have lacked since Craig Barr left) is a ball-playing centre-back. McGeever and Morgyn would probably agree that their strengths don't lie with the ball at their feet - and that's where we fall down massively imo. It was the same last season, and was something I remember posting on here.

That leaves us with plenty of the ball in deep positions where teams are happy to let us knock it about. But without a plan going forward. So they eventually launch it over the ball playing midfield and towards the technical - but small/isolated - strikeforce.

It sounds daft given we've been excellent defensively this season and very poor going forward. But I genuinely think if you slotted a ball-playing defender in there we'd notice a massive difference. 

Is it Duffy's fault we play the way we do? Is it the players? I've no idea. Unless we were in the changing room and at training during the week then there's no way of knowing. But something has to change. Because not playing good football and not scoring is a recipe for disaster. If you're playing good football the chances will come. If you're scoring goals but eye-bleeding to watch, you'll get results. We're stuck in the worst of both worlds.

Are you not ideally placed to get the answers to these questions Jan ?  

I agree with most of your comments, but with one major difference.  At the level we're at, I don't look for my centre-backs to be great footballers, but I do expect my midfield players to do what every other team seems to, and that is to drop back and/or make space to take the ball from them and then start the play.  Last season Clyde had Raymond Grant, Thistle have Stuart Bannigan and Falkirk have Gary Miller, to name but three.  And ourselves ?  Well, we have Ross Forbes waiting hopefully for the defender's header from one of our many surface-to-air missiles to (occasionally) land at his feet.  

I've already made some observations on RF, and whilst there's nothing personal in it, I don't believe we can make progress with both him and Wedderburn in the same line-up.  And it there's a choice to be made then it has to be Big Nat every time.  The midfield is such a key area and our absence of box-to-box players is crippling us, this and poor ball retention results in us often camped in our own half.  Wedderburn can't do box-to-box but others can.  So here's a revolutionary idea; Carsy at right-back, Church at left-back and a midfield four of Wardrop, Hamilton, Wedderburn and Rico, with Frizzell and Wilson up top. 

Feel free to suggest it to Mr Duffy.

[Jan Vojáček]

1 hour ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

Are you not ideally placed to get the answers to these questions Jan ?  

I agree with most of your comments, but with one major difference.  At the level we're at, I don't look for my centre-backs to be great footballers, but I do expect my midfield players to do what every other team seems to, and that is to drop back and/or make space to take the ball from them and then start the play.  Last season Clyde had Raymond Grant, Thistle have Stuart Bannigan and Falkirk have Gary Miller, to name but three.  And ourselves ?  Well, we have Ross Forbes waiting hopefully for the defender's header from one of our many surface-to-air missiles to (occasionally) land at his feet.  

I've already made some observations on RF, and whilst there's nothing personal in it, I don't believe we can make progress with both him and Wedderburn in the same line-up.  And it there's a choice to be made then it has to be Big Nat every time.  The midfield is such a key area and our absence of box-to-box players is crippling us, this and poor ball retention results in us often camped in our own half.  Wedderburn can't do box-to-box but others can.  So here's a revolutionary idea; Carsy at right-back, Church at left-back and a midfield four of Wardrop, Hamilton, Wedderburn and Rico, with Frizzell and Wilson up top. 

Feel free to suggest it to Mr Duffy.

I value my front teeth too much to ask such a question!

[FifeSons]

5 minutes ago, Jan Vojáček said:

I value my front teeth too much to ask such a question!

Probably a wise move.

[squeezeboxson]

9 hours ago, Jan Vojáček said:

I might be in the minority here, but I think they are - yes.

Let's take it from the front to the back.

Up top we have Jaime Wilson. A tireless runner, a guy who's shown he can finish one-on-one, do the nasty stuff and certainly has a bit of skill in his locker. We then have Adam Frizzell and PJ Crossan, two not dissimilar young players who are quick, skilful, good on the ball and have an eye for a pass - but just need to work on the final ball. In Frizzell's case he needs to shoot more often, in PJ's he probably needs to pass more often.

Now there's no reason why the the three of them (either in a 4-3-3, a 4-4-1-1 or even a 4-4-2) can't be a threat at this level.

Dropping back into midfield, we have the gorgeous touch and control of Nat Wedderburn, Chris Hamilton who has shown himself to be tenacious but good on the ball and Carsy - who we all know is a nice passer and can keep play ticking over. We have Forbes too obviously, he has all the quality in the world - but hasn't really shown it since the Forfar game before lockdown. So lets take the three players I've mentioned instead. We lack a McKee/Agnew-esque player to make a killer forward pass or driving run - but again there is technical quality there. And again there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to form a good midfield out of what we have.

At full-back Sam Wardrop has looked far more like the player he was in his first loan spell, whilst Rico is solid - albeit not often a threat going forward. Which is fine. You don't want two full-backs bombing forwards.

The two centre-halves are solid defensively. No question. But what we lack (and have lacked since Craig Barr left) is a ball-playing centre-back. McGeever and Morgyn would probably agree that their strengths don't lie with the ball at their feet - and that's where we fall down massively imo. It was the same last season, and was something I remember posting on here.

That leaves us with plenty of the ball in deep positions where teams are happy to let us knock it about. But without a plan going forward. So they eventually launch it over the ball playing midfield and towards the technical - but small/isolated - strikeforce.

It sounds daft given we've been excellent defensively this season and very poor going forward. But I genuinely think if you slotted a ball-playing defender in there we'd notice a massive difference. 

Is it Duffy's fault we play the way we do? Is it the players? I've no idea. Unless we were in the changing room and at training during the week then there's no way of knowing. But something has to change. Because not playing good football and not scoring is a recipe for disaster. If you're playing good football the chances will come. If you're scoring goals but eye-bleeding to watch, you'll get results. We're stuck in the worst of both worlds.

Surely it falls on the manager either way? Either we are training this way and putting in to practice in matches or we are training to play another way and then it goes out the window on match days. Regardless, the manager should be making sure that doesn't happen. Given how reasonable a reputation Jim has for being a decent "man manager" then I'd be surprised if it is the latter.

I do, however, agree that we have players capable of better and I also that feel we are 1 creative midfield player away from being a much better looking team to watch. Touched on it a couple of days ago, but I feel a fit Crossan, Wilson and Frizzell with 1 other would be a decent attacking force from the wings and strikers. The issue for me at the moment is that I haven't seen enough from Johnstone or Jones to suggest they are up to being the 4th player on that set up. Even though, on paper, they should fit well with being a target with those players around them.

[Jumbo Muir]

Again, faultless streaming of today’s game accompanied by easy to listen to commentary.
Well done folks. [emoji106]

[Howlin' Wilf]

On 28/11/2020 at 18:06, O'Kelly Isley III said:

Meanwhile back at the ranch Dumbarton rather contradicting those who thought we played poorly at Firhill last week.

FTFY 

[The Moonster]

Commentary is still ahead of the action for me, the commentator had said Wedderburn had scored before the ball was even in the box. Understand there's very little the club can do about it but it'd be nice if Pixellot would. The service and commentary from our side is excellent though and I'm delighted with it all in. My mum had trouble accessing games and even paid for a game when she didn't need to but after one message it was sorted in about a minute. Couldn't ask for more from the club in that regard in these times.