The Official Airdrieonians Thread - 2019/20 and beyond

[Passionate]

1 hour ago, Stevo1968 said:

I’ve never been one to call for the manager to go but I do think it’s time him and Miller were gone, the team looks stale and needs a new lease of life to guide them imo 

Has the Director of Football been told to justify his job, is that why we are seeing an unhealthy situation with Millar apparently watching Murray at training and in game situations, if so why....    Is Millar on the bench due to having "fire back in the belly" or is it because of an amateurish situation that  we only have one qualified coach and league rules state you must have a minimum of 2 qualified coaches in the dug out area,  Millar i believe fits the 2nd coach criteria....

 

This situation needs to be resolved and quickly...

[Stevo1968]

7 minutes ago, ShineOnYouCrazyDiamonds said:

Who we voting for player of the month? Carrick because it's the only correct answer or Sabatini just to make a point?

Just me that doesn’t see the big fuss with sabatini? Yes he’s better than McKay but nothing special...

also watched the highlights and the amount of chances we had to win that game was more than enough, Crighton defending was awful..

[Diamonds are Forever]

4 hours ago, waysider said:

In so far as yesterday’s match is concerned taken on it's own I disagree with most posters. We dominated possession and had more shots on target than in any other game so far. The ball did not bounce favourably for us in their penalty area and we were hit by 2 breakaway goals (albeit defensive mistakes). On another day we would  have won.

However, on a broader front we have major issues. Firstly, who picks the players we sign.? If it is Murray he obviously doesn’t have an eye for a player. If it someone else, Murray will obviously not fancy some of them. 
Murray has 2 major problems. His grasp of tactics is fairly grim. An example from yesterday was substituting a forward who was playing well when we were 2 down.His second major problem is team selection. He seems to put the names in a hat and pull 11 out every week. I’ve lost count of the number of times I think we’ve a better team on the bench than on the park! It’s disgrace and he’s been like that since he came. 

However, there’s a problem in getting rid of him. It would cost the club money which they probably don’t have.

I’ve been an Airdrie fan all my life and am getting fed up with all these false dawns. I suspect others may be too. 

 

The ball not bouncing favourably in their penalty area is not luck though. It is a) having instinctive strikers b) having quality delivery into good areas c) having numbers in the box. I don't have any time for this reason/excuse after games, good teams do not rely on the ball falling for them in the penalty box.

Of the three factors above, we have one quite instinctive striker in Gallagher. A lot of his goals last year were from being in the right place and reading the game well, his movement for his winner at Falkirk is a great example of that. However, we have poor delivery into the box and a lack of numbers in the box. Our delivery is poor but to be fair to those players if we only have 1, maximum 2, players in the box then they need to be Kevin de Bruyne to regularly find their man.

We only had 4 players yesterday who were able to get into attacking positions. Thomson doesn't really leave the right wing and Connell drifted out there quite a bit, so all we had in the box was Gallagher and sometimes Carrick cutting in. Murray said after the game that he knew Dumbarton were going to sit with 2 banks of 4, which makes me question how he thought these 4 players would break down Dumbarton's 2 banks of 4. Unless you have exceptional forwards then you'll need more bodies in the box to get the 'break of the ball' and give the wide players a bigger target in the area. I'm not expecting or wanting some crazy attacking football, but I think taking one of the deep lying midfielders out and putting an extra attacker in somewhere is going to be needed this season unless we hope to scrape 1-0 wins all season. You do not need a back 4 and 2 deep lying midfielders in a game like yesterday, especially when one ball over the top is able to take out the entire team anyway.

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by Diamonds are Forever

[Jack Reed]

1 hour ago, Diamonds are Forever said:

 

The ball not bouncing favourably in their penalty area is not luck though. It is a) having instinctive strikers b) having quality delivery into good areas c) having numbers in the box. I don't have any time for this reason/excuse after games, good teams do not rely on the ball falling for them in the penalty box.

Of the three factors above, we have one quite instinctive striker in Gallagher. A lot of his goals last year were from being in the right place and reading the game well, his movement for his winner at Falkirk is a great example of that. However, we have poor delivery into the box and a lack of numbers in the box. Our delivery is poor but to be fair to those players if we only have 1, maximum 2, players in the box then they need to be Kevin de Bruyne to regularly find their man.

We only had 4 players yesterday who were able to get into attacking positions. Thomson doesn't really leave the right wing and Connell drifted out there quite a bit, so all we had in the box was Gallagher and sometimes Carrick cutting in. Murray said after the game that he knew Dumbarton were going to sit with 2 banks of 4, which makes me question how he thought these 4 players would break down Dumbarton's 2 banks of 4. Unless you have exceptional forwards then you'll need more bodies in the box to get the 'break of the ball' and give the wide players a bigger target in the area. I'm not expecting or wanting some crazy attacking football, but I think taking one of the deep lying midfielders out and putting an extra attacker in somewhere is going to be needed this season unless we hope to scrape 1-0 wins all season. You do not need a back 4 and 2 deep lying midfielders in a game like yesterday, especially when one ball over the top is able to take out the entire team anyway.

 

Wedderburn  played more good passes than our  back 4 p ut together, chrighton passing is woeful, was that not why last season Kerr moved back, 

[AndyDD]

https://www.idlehandsduffy.com/post/diamond-watches-airdrieonians-0-2-dumbarton

Well that was a sack of shite eh? 

Game should never have been played, given the weather... 

A lot of predictable, heids-gone panic amongst our support, but worth remembering we lost two of the opening four last season and still ended up third after 28 games when the campaign was curtailed. 

Really poor from us, rank rotten at times. Lacked the energetic, harrying press that seemed to be a bit of a hallmark last year. You want that appetite from the off and it was sorely lacking yesterday. I expect now we'll be very similar to last year; mostly good, with odd days like that peppered in to leave us scrapping for playoffs. 

Alternatively I'm too optimistic and next saturday is a relegation six pointer... 

[TheBuckfastTriangle]

Easy to say with hindsight, but Kerr/McKay in a midfield up against a stodgy Dumbarton always felt suspect to me, not nearly enough movement in there.

As @Diamonds are Forever points out, 4 attacking players (at most) is always going to make it difficult to score goals. Our full backs don't tend to spend enough time high enough up the park to provide an extra threat and the midfield certainly lacks a cutting edge. Our best spell under Murray was when Kurtis Roberts filled this role and linked things up/was prepared to go beyond the strikers. Maybe this is the equivalent of Forfar away last year where Murray realised that the mindset had to be more forward thinking - we can only hope.

My concern now would be that a "passable" season would still be around the 15 points per round of fixtures and with only 3 from 9 so far, only 4 home games in each of the remaining "thirds" and the last 4 games of this quarter suddenly looking very awkward (Cove and Montrose at home, East Fife and Falkirk away) I'm not sure where those points are coming from. The next 2 league games do seem like important fixtures in terms of our season.

[Stevo1968]

49 minutes ago, TheBuckfastTriangle said:

Easy to say with hindsight, but Kerr/McKay in a midfield up against a stodgy Dumbarton always felt suspect to me, not nearly enough movement in there.

As @Diamonds are Forever points out, 4 attacking players (at most) is always going to make it difficult to score goals. Our full backs don't tend to spend enough time high enough up the park to provide an extra threat and the midfield certainly lacks a cutting edge. Our best spell under Murray was when Kurtis Roberts filled this role and linked things up/was prepared to go beyond the strikers. Maybe this is the equivalent of Forfar away last year where Murray realised that the mindset had to be more forward thinking - we can only hope.

My concern now would be that a "passable" season would still be around the 15 points per round of fixtures and with only 3 from 9 so far, only 4 home games in each of the remaining "thirds" and the last 4 games of this quarter suddenly looking very awkward (Cove and Montrose at home, East Fife and Falkirk away) I'm not sure where those points are coming from. The next 2 league games do seem like important fixtures in terms of our season.

If I’m being honest I don’t see what difference a different midfield would have done to that game we had more than enough chances to win that game that fell to our strikers. They go in we’re not complaining about anything so it’s the forward line that are to be blamed for the lack of cutting edge, they had enough of opportunities! 
 

it’s the formation I think that is the issue, we’ve never done well in a 442, 4231 was the formation that brought us success last year and a first game of the season win and good performance against Patrick so why change it...

[Jack Reed]

23 hours ago, ShineOnYouCrazyDiamonds said:

Who we voting for player of the month? Carrick because it's the only correct answer or Sabatini just to make a point?

Or Fordyce, 

[Jack Reed]

3 hours ago, Stevo1968 said:

If I’m being honest I don’t see what difference a different midfield would have done to that game we had more than enough chances to win that game that fell to our strikers. They go in we’re not complaining about anything so it’s the forward line that are to be blamed for the lack of cutting edge, they had enough of opportunities! 
 

it’s the formation I think that is the issue, we’ve never done well in a 442, 4231 was the formation that brought us success last year and a first game of the season win and good performance against Patrick so why change it...

Bit of quality in midfield would help, in fact a bit of quality all over would help, 

[Stevo1968]

12 minutes ago, Jack Reed said:

Bit of quality in midfield would help, in fact a bit of quality all over would help, 

Quality all over but I think you need a ‘10’ type player to bridge the gap between midfield and forward no necessarily different ones behind.

 

Bottom line is if we take our many chances on Saturday and Crighton doesn’t have a shocker then we’re not even mentioning the midfield...

[ShineOnYouCrazyDiamonds]

Had a look over it and while there are other factors to consider such as who was playing and who we were playing against, since the start of last season (and counting league games only) the numbers show that 4231 has been our most used and probably most successful formation.

In 15 games using 4231, we've scored 24, conceded 13, and picked up 27 points. That's an average of 1.8 points per game, 1.6 scored per game and 0.87 goals conceded per game.

We've only used a standard 442 in 4 league games, and in those games we've scored 4, conceded 7 and picked up 4 points. That's one point per game, one goal scored per game, and 1.57 conceded per game.

We've used 352 (or 532 depending on who you ask) in 7 league games. In those games we've scored 7 goals, conceded 11, and picked up 10 points. That's 1.43 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 1.57 goals conceded per game.

We also used a narrow 442 on five occasions at the end of last season. This involved Wedderburn sitting in front of the back 4 with three midfielders in front of him, so I like to call it a 4132. Using this we scored 5, conceded 1 and picked up 10 points. That's 2 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 0.2 conceded per game.

In terms of points per game, 4132 is the winner here, but in the five games we used it we beat Peterhead, Clyde and East Fife, drew with Dumbarton and lost to Montrose. Given we never used it against Falkirk or Raith Rovers you could argue that it's not a fair sample compared to the other ones. One thing this shape definitely has going for it is the defensive record. Fair enough it wasn't used against the division's two big boys, but only conceding one in 5 is seriously good going.

442 might seem solid, but we've conceded more goals per game using it than any other formation, and by a considerable amount (perhaps not surprising after seeing us lose 2-0 to Dumbarton while using it at the weekend). 352 has a fairly poor defensive record too, but this is a bit warped by that 4-1 hammering we took in Methil.

The clear winner for me is 4231. It's the only formation we average better than a goal a game with (a bit grim that we're that toothless with every other formation). Obviously the momentum and form we had going when we used this formation might have pushed the goals per game higher than it should be, but 1.8 is far better than the rest. While doing this, we were also conceding less than a goal a game. Maybe not as solid as 4132, but it's fairly solid and also gives us goals. 1.8 points per game over a considerable amount of games is decent and would have us in the playoffs most seasons.

So there it is, it's probably nonsense that doesn't matter but it turns out we score more when we have a decent link between midfield and attack, and concede less when we have a midfielder that sits just in front of defence on his own. We also don't concede that much when we just go for it and play attacking football.

Quick summary for people who hate stats or reading long posts: going for it and attacking good, sitting in and inviting pressure bad.

Edited November 2, 2020 by ShineOnYouCrazyDiamonds

[Wise old Elf]

On 01/11/2020 at 10:53, waysider said:

In so far as yesterday’s match is concerned taken on it's own I disagree with most posters. We dominated possession and had more shots on target than in any other game so far. The ball did not bounce favourably for us in their penalty area and we were hit by 2 breakaway goals (albeit defensive mistakes). On another day we would  have won.

However, on a broader front we have major issues. Firstly, who picks the players we sign.? If it is Murray he obviously doesn’t have an eye for a player. If it someone else, Murray will obviously not fancy some of them. 
Murray has 2 major problems. His grasp of tactics is fairly grim. An example from yesterday was substituting a forward who was playing well when we were 2 down.His second major problem is team selection. He seems to put the names in a hat and pull 11 out every week. I’ve lost count of the number of times I think we’ve a better team on the bench than on the park! It’s disgrace and he’s been like that since he came. 

However, there’s a problem in getting rid of him. It would cost the club money which they probably don’t have.

I’ve been an Airdrie fan all my life and am getting fed up with all these false dawns. I suspect others may be too. 

I know exactly how you feel. We badly need to get out of this league and just as we feel its going to happen we again fall short of the early promise. I have very little confidence that our current manager can achieve that given his lack of good tactics and poor decisions for example waiting far too long to make changes in a team so obviously going nowhere Vs Dumbarton what was he watching ?? 

[Stevo1968]

35 minutes ago, ShineOnYouCrazyDiamonds said:

Had a look over it and while there are other factors to consider such as who was playing and who we were playing against, since the start of last season (and counting league games only) the numbers show that 4231 has been our most used and probably most successful formation.

In 15 games using 4231, we've scored 24, conceded 13, and picked up 27 points. That's an average of 1.8 points per game, 1.6 scored per game and 0.87 goals conceded per game.

We've only used a standard 442 in 4 league games, and in those games we've scored 4, conceded 7 and picked up 4 points. That's one point per game, one goal scored per game, and 1.57 conceded per game.

We've used 352 (or 532 depending on who you ask) in 7 league games. In those games we've scored 7 goals, conceded 11, and picked up 10 points. That's 1.43 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 1.57 goals conceded per game.

We also used a narrow 442 on five occasions at the end of last season. This involved Wedderburn sitting in front of the back 4 with three midfielders in front of him, so I like to call it a 4132. Using this we scored 5, conceded 1 and picked up 10 points. That's 2 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 0.2 conceded per game.

In terms of points per game, 4132 is the winner here, but in the five games we used it we beat Peterhead, Clyde and East Fife, drew with Dumbarton and lost to Montrose. Given we never used it against Falkirk or Raith Rovers you could argue that it's not a fair sample compared to the other ones. One thing this shape definitely has going for it is the defensive record. Fair enough it wasn't used against the division's two big boys, but only conceding one in 5 is seriously good going.

442 might seem solid, but we've conceded more goals per game using it than any other formation, and by a considerable amount (perhaps not surprising after seeing us lose 2-0 to Dumbarton while using it at the weekend). 352 has a fairly poor defensive record too, but this is a bit warped by that 4-1 hammering we took in Methil.

The clear winner for me is 4231. It's the only formation we average better than a goal a game with (a bit grim that we're that toothless with every other formation). Obviously the momentum and form we had going when we used this formation might have pushed the goals per game higher than it should be, but 1.8 is far better than the rest. While doing this, we were also conceding less than a goal a game. Maybe not as solid as 4132, but it's fairly solid and also gives us goals. 1.8 points per game over a considerable amount of games is decent and would have us in the playoffs most seasons.

So there it is, it's probably nonsense that doesn't matter but it turns out we score more when we have a decent link between midfield and attack, and concede less when we have a midfielder that sits just in front of defence on his own. We also don't concede that much when we just go for it and play attacking football.

Quick summary for people who hate stats or reading long posts: going for it and attacking good, sitting in and inviting pressure bad.

Backs up my previous post and thoughts, great analysis! 

[Diamond10]

Had a look over it and while there are other factors to consider such as who was playing and who we were playing against, since the start of last season (and counting league games only) the numbers show that 4231 has been our most used and probably most successful formation.

In 15 games using 4231, we've scored 24, conceded 13, and picked up 27 points. That's an average of 1.8 points per game, 1.6 scored per game and 0.87 goals conceded per game.

We've only used a standard 442 in 4 league games, and in those games we've scored 4, conceded 7 and picked up 4 points. That's one point per game, one goal scored per game, and 1.57 conceded per game.

We've used 352 (or 532 depending on who you ask) in 7 league games. In those games we've scored 7 goals, conceded 11, and picked up 10 points. That's 1.43 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 1.57 goals conceded per game.

We also used a narrow 442 on five occasions at the end of last season. This involved Wedderburn sitting in front of the back 4 with three midfielders in front of him, so I like to call it a 4132. Using this we scored 5, conceded 1 and picked up 10 points. That's 2 points per game, 1 goal scored per game, and 0.2 conceded per game.

In terms of points per game, 4132 is the winner here, but in the five games we used it we beat Peterhead, Clyde and East Fife, drew with Dumbarton and lost to Montrose. Given we never used it against Falkirk or Raith Rovers you could argue that it's not a fair sample compared to the other ones. One thing this shape definitely has going for it is the defensive record. Fair enough it wasn't used against the division's two big boys, but only conceding one in 5 is seriously good going.

442 might seem solid, but we've conceded more goals per game using it than any other formation, and by a considerable amount (perhaps not surprising after seeing us lose 2-0 to Dumbarton while using it at the weekend). 352 has a fairly poor defensive record too, but this is a bit warped by that 4-1 hammering we took in Methil.

The clear winner for me is 4231. It's the only formation we average better than a goal a game with (a bit grim that we're that toothless with every other formation). Obviously the momentum and form we had going when we used this formation might have pushed the goals per game higher than it should be, but 1.8 is far better than the rest. While doing this, we were also conceding less than a goal a game. Maybe not as solid as 4132, but it's fairly solid and also gives us goals. 1.8 points per game over a considerable amount of games is decent and would have us in the playoffs most seasons.

So there it is, it's probably nonsense that doesn't matter but it turns out we score more when we have a decent link between midfield and attack, and concede less when we have a midfielder that sits just in front of defence on his own. We also don't concede that much when we just go for it and play attacking football.

Quick summary for people who hate stats or reading long posts: going for it and attacking good, sitting in and inviting pressure bad.

Great analysis mate and interesting findings. I’m sure it shows what most were already thinking. I know we are only a few games into the season but I think the attacking options we had at the end of last season are far superior to the options we are currently looking that. We had Chucky and Callum smith both creative and good strikers . Kurtis Robert’s who all be it was a bit of enigma showed glimpses of what he could do going forward. Even big Nat sitting deep allowed other such as McKay to bomb forward and was a threat from set pieces.

I hope oreilly and Robert get a run out this week as we need to find a spark of creativity from somewhere. This Saturday already terrifyingly has the feeling of a must win for us.

[Eric the half a b]

1 minute ago, Diamond10 said:

 

Great analysis mate and interesting findings. I’m sure it shows what most were already thinking. I know we are only a few games into the season but I think the attacking options we had at the end of last season are far superior to the options we are currently looking that. We had Chucky and Callum smith both creative and good strikers . Kurtis Robert’s who all be it was a bit of enigma showed glimpses of what he could do going forward. Even big Nat sitting deep allowed other such as McKay to bomb forward and was a threat from set pieces.

I hope oreilly and Robert get a run out this week as we need to find a spark of creativity from somewhere. This Saturday already terrifyingly has the feeling of a must win for us.

 

As you say good work on the stats. 

I have been following the diamonds for many years and you don't expect miracles but what bugs me is this we are hard to beat nonsense all good teams need to be solid but you need to create a more positive vibe if you want to be successful and to get the fans to buy into your goals. Its the games we loose to teams we expect to beat and don't we can't always be unlucky against these teams.

How many players have we brought in the past couple of seasons who have had a handful of games. 

Three games in and need to improve still could go the rest of the season unbeaten...... going to get my meds now

[Diamond72]

Airdrie supporters for years now have gotten by with the hope that things will improve. We still cling on with the slightest glimmer. What is so disapponting for me this season is  the disappointment of not signing a proven goalscorer and the situation where creative players are benched to make way for a defensive setup. I would still be disappointed if we were scraping draws and 1-0s against the bottom sides. Football is an entertainment business in case no-one noticed!

[Old Diamond]

Airdrie supporters for years now have gotten by with the hope that things will improve. We still cling on with the slightest glimmer. What is so disapponting for me this season is  the disappointment of not signing a proven goalscorer and the situation where creative players are benched to make way for a defensive setup. I would still be disappointed if we were scraping draws and 1-0s against the bottom sides. Football is an entertainment business in case no-one noticed!

Amen to that, there is a danger here for many clubs that supporters will fall out of the habit of going to the grounds by the time eventually fans are allowed back in. If a team are thought of as not being entertaining this will not help, and crowds will be down, we cannot afford that

[AndyDD]

1 hour ago, Old Diamond said:

16 hours ago, Diamond72 said:

Airdrie supporters for years now have gotten by with the hope that things will improve. We still cling on with the slightest glimmer. What is so disapponting for me this season is  the disappointment of not signing a proven goalscorer and the situation where creative players are benched to make way for a defensive setup. I would still be disappointed if we were scraping draws and 1-0s against the bottom sides. Football is an entertainment business in case no-one noticed!

Amen to that, there is a danger here for many clubs that supporters will fall out of the habit of going to the grounds by the time eventually fans are allowed back in. If a team are thought of as not being entertaining this will not help, and crowds will be down, we cannot afford that

Unless we manage to get results whilst being a dull watch. We managed to both lose and play boring football, a toxic combination.

Nothing attracts fans more than a successful side. Play the most exciting football ever all ye like, if you get scudded every game, the fans won't be going along for 'entertainment' value. 

Football isnae an entertainment business, ultimately. It's a sport. The results drive fan attendance, not the entertainment value. Win every game 1-0 and the attendances will be plenty healthy. 

Edited November 3, 2020 by AndyDD

[Mr November]

On 02/11/2020 at 23:43, David W said:

Millar - Toothy turnip brought in a couple of decent players (McCusker, McMillan) but made the big mistake of not putting together a good centre of midfield, which did nothing to protect a strong centre half pairing of Lithgow/McMillan. Best goalie in the Juniors, worst goalie we've ever had in Hutchison. Pretty obvious the players were at it, he had no control over them, so gains a bit of sympathy. Somehow managed to beat Queen's Park which stopped them beating us 12 times in a row, so a bonus point for that. 

An interesting post on Stuart Millar’s time in charge of Clyde over on their thread. I thought it was quite notable that he wasn’t able to put together a good midfield there. I think most Airdrie fans would agree that midfield, in particular their lack of creative output and support for the strikers, has been our biggest problem over the last couple of seasons. 

[Jack Reed]

Ian Russell signed for cowdenbeath, retired from us years ago, had another lease of life, we could have used him the now,