The Queen of the South thread

[Guest Flash]

We have scored 23 league goals this season. After 24 games last season, we had scored 22 league goals - in away games alone. It was 42 in total.

After 24 games under Gus, we had scored 27. Therefore, so far this season, Fowler's team has scored 4 goals less than MacPherson's.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Flash

[Broony88]

We have scored 23 league goals this season. After 24 games last season, we had scored 22 league goals - in away games alone. It was 42 in total.

After 24 games under Gus, we had scored 27. Therefore, so far this season, Fowler's team has scored 4 goals less than MacPherson's.

Tam Brighton >>>>>>> Jake Pickard.

[SUPERSOUTH]

Tam Brighton >>>>>>> Jake Pickard.

Very unfair on Jake give the lad a chance he is only just 18 breaking thro into first team football, anyone remember Reilly/Holt at that age at palmerston I do very raw youth players.

[football maniac]

Tbh Pickard has looked hopeless regardless of his age. Players in the first team should only be judged on how they perform and Pickard has been hopeless. Reilly and Smith on the other hand always looked promising when they featured at his age. He shouldn't be featuring until he's ready which he clearly isn't yet but that's not to say he won't be in the future. McShane took a while to adjust to this level so hopefully pickard can do the same

[RUSTY1111]

We have scored 23 league goals this season. After 24 games last season, we had scored 22 league goals - in away games alone. It was 42 in total.

After 24 games under Gus, we had scored 27. Therefore, so far this season, Fowler's team has scored 4 goals less than MacPherson's.

Very poor return. Of the 23 one was an own goal by Gasparotto from Morton and 14 of those others split evenly 7 & 7 by Lyle & Russell, that leaves 8 split between 8 other players.

[RUSTY1111]

232 appearances ( 201 starts plus 31 from the bench ) and 6 goals for Queens between Feb 1985 and May 1993

What are the stats for Colin Harris 1995-96, a player from Sanquhar that was around a few different clubs before retiring at Queens?

[Rjc-1988]

I must admit that I was very hopeful that after a spirited display against Rangers we would be capable of a good performance at the FFS.

Unfortunately that never materialised. Our midfield players are so pedestrian and lacking in any creativity. Murdoch looks no better than what we have and Hutton keeps retaining his position aftera string of pretty poor displays. Tapping will probably emerge now but when you look at his profile he is another defensive type player in the mould of Hutton. So probably more of the same. Millar is the only one who I would personally persevere with for no other reason than he has genuine ability to beat players and attack in the final third but in saying that we seldom see any evidence of it.The rest are completely one dimensional.

The forward players are equally disappointing with no spark in their play and the goals for column tells its own story. The manager seems incapable of pepping things up despite trying various permutations. I honestly cant see us getting 4th place unless there is a radical overhaul of tactics and attitude from the players but I am not sure that this squad is actually good enough. Our competitors for 4th are similarly ordinary but Raith and Morton have a few more goals in them and St Mirren might eventually do something. We clearly have to start winning the head to heads against these teams and to do that we will probably have tokeep a succession of clean sheets as the prospect of us scoring two goals in a game is a big long shot.

[RUSTY1111]

232 appearances ( 201 starts plus 31 from the bench ) and 6 goals for Queens between Feb 1985 and May 1993

Remember watching Sim. Thought he was perhaps at Queens for a longer spell but remember him from 1988-89 better than those earlier seasons...

[Monkey Tennis]

We have scored 23 league goals this season. After 24 games last season, we had scored 22 league goals - in away games alone. It was 42 in total.

After 24 games under Gus, we had scored 27. Therefore, so far this season, Fowler's team has scored 4 goals less than MacPherson's.

All pretty damning.

It seems incredible that we can almost half the number of goals scored last season, yet hover around a similar position in the table.

Apologists will point to the fact that we had the same manager for most of last season as this. They'll point with some justification to the players we've lost - Reilly and McShane in particular. They'll point also to the role that injury has played in our attempts to replace them.

I think that all these points need to be conceded. It's also true though that our negativity, particularly when clinging to what would be seen as a good result and particularly in away games, has gone a long way to ensuring a laughable 'goals for' column and a lot of bored fans.

[Rjc-1988]

Yes Monkey Tennis yesterday was a great example of what is wrong with our negative approach.

Falkirk playing with one up in the first half were extremely poor and despite us not creating one solitary chance from open play we went in 1-0 up. A great bonus when 0-0 would have been a fairer reflection of a terrible 45 minsof football.

Our management team and our players seemed to assume that Falkirk would continue to play the same way and if we kept it tight we could hold out for a 0-1.

We should have made changes at HT because none of our forwards posed any threat whatsoever and we should have tried to catch Falkirk out by going all out for the second goal.

No Queens fan that I know is supportive of this negativity - i have never seen a smaller away support at the FFS for what was an important game. The only reason that we are still in striking distance of 4th is the fact that theother contenders are equally uninspiring.

[overthetop]

I'm not sure Fowler would accept he's negative although there's been considerable evidence to back that up. It's more a case the squad has little quality even though he keeps claiming the opposite.

[Rjc-1988]

I think you are right - with the exception of the back 4 a major clear out is necessary but when you do that it is debatable how attractive we are as a Club in terms of recruitment. Michael Paton is a case in point. I am not sure whether Fowler wanted to keep him or not - I suspect not - but I am sure if it was a choice between say Dunfermline with AJ and ourselves Dunfermline would be the winners. More so next season if they come up as anicipated. Ironically enough Paton's hamstring seems to have healed up and has been playing very well. Certainly I would have Paton over Harris and Conroy any day especially if his injury woes are behind him.

The one player who might make a difference is Hillson so long as he can avoid a re-occurrence of the injury in the early games back.

[Guest Flash]

I accept that changes to the squad are necessary. But I can't help thinking that the current players are capable of more. Even the squad Gus assembled managed to score 3 goals in one game against the champions with the best defensive record in the division after Johnson took over. Of course, they still lost because there were still one or two duffers in the team and he had no time to work on their fitness. Even then, they were a goal line clearance away from it finishing 4-4.

The current team had Rangers pinned back for a good part of the last 20 minutes last week. I appreciate that Rangers probably took their foot off the gas. However, the point remains that if the players were incapable of playing attacking football the last part of the game wouldn't have panned out like it did.

Pickard isn't in the team for his attacking capabilities. He is in it so he can drop back and be an extra midfield player. Even last week, if the idea had been to win the game, we would have started with as much pace as possible in the team in attacking areas. This is the most likely way to score when you're not going to have much possession. He could have played Russell on the left, Harris on the right with Smith and Lyle in the middle. Instead, he had Conroy and Pickard plodding about with the main aim of stopping Rangers from playing.

Of course, Rangers have a miles bigger budget than us and we can't expect to go toe to toe with them and win. But what was the difference in the two clubs' budget in 2008? I don't remember us trying to borefest the Cup final. Similarly, Aberdeen's budget must have been at least as high as Hibs. Don't recall the semi-final being a borefest.

Now we are apparently so far behind Falkirk, we have to go there and try to get a 0-0 or, glory be, score one goal and defend for the rest of the game.

[Broony88]

I accept that changes to the squad are necessary. But I can't help thinking that the current players are capable of more. Even the squad Gus assembled managed to score 3 goals in one game against the champions with the best defensive record in the division after Johnson took over. Of course, they still lost because there were still one or two duffers in the team and he had no time to work on their fitness. Even then, they were a goal line clearance away from it finishing 4-4.

The current team had Rangers pinned back for a good part of the last 20 minutes last week. I appreciate that Rangers probably took their foot off the gas. However, the point remains that if the players were incapable of playing attacking football the last part of the game wouldn't have panned out like it did.

Pickard isn't in the team for his attacking capabilities. He is in it so he can drop back and be an extra midfield player. Even last week, if the idea had been to win the game, we would have started with as much pace as possible in the team in attacking areas. This is the most likely way to score when you're not going to have much possession. He could have played Russell on the left, Harris on the right with Smith and Lyle in the middle. Instead, he had Conroy and Pickard plodding about with the main aim of stopping Rangers from playing.

Of course, Rangers have a miles bigger budget than us and we can't expect to go toe to toe with them and win. But what was the difference in the two clubs' budget in 2008? I don't remember us trying to borefest the Cup final. Similarly, Aberdeen's budget must have been at least as high as Hibs. Don't recall the semi-final being a borefest.

Now we are apparently so far behind Falkirk, we have to go there and try to get a 0-0 or, glory be, score one goal and defend for the rest of the game.

I genuinely think it's time for Fowler to go. He seems incapable of setting a team up to have a go from the start and his inclusion of Pickard every week is strange to say the very least. I along with most have seen next to nothing from him in the positions he has been tried. Aidan Smith is a much bigger threat with his pace in behind and will score the odd goal whereas Pickard never looks like scoring. Hopefully once Hilson is fully fit we will see the best of him, unfortunately I think Pickard will now move back into midfield where again he is not ready for this level. He must have been caught offside about 5 times yesterday and has zero anticipation or pace not a great combo. Would love to be proved wrong but at this moment in time he is knowhere near good enough.

If we continue to set up not to lose over the next few weeks teams like Dumbarton and Livi will be closing the gap and the way things have been going we probably have more chance of capitulating for 9th than stringing a winning run together for 4th.

Edited February 28, 2016 by Broony88

[palmy_cammy]

It's ridiculously harsh to make Pickard some sort of scapegoat. Aside from his age, he's only recently come into the team and been man of the match in some of his appearances. If we are to use his inclusion to somehow be representative of the managers mentality I'd suggest it shows his willingness to try different things having realised what we're doing isn't working.

Sadly it appears he is unable to extract consistent or entertaining performances out of the squad no matter what he tries. This doesn't reflect well on him, but having expected a tough and ultimately fruitless season in the summer it does seem very harsh to sack him for delivering precisely that.

Although I've rejected the suggestion in the past I suppose the Gus comparison is only natural. Both had a major rebuilding job to do, and both produced pretty insipid performances on the park. Fowler isn't going to get us relegated though and Gus didn't provide anything like the success of last season so for me the comparison ends there. Macpherson stuck with the same underperforming personnel and seemed to hold this stubborn belief that his methods were working. Fowler at least seems to recognise the problems we have. Although as I've already said his inability to do anything about them is where he slips up.

The main complaint held against Jim McIntyre was that he had us "punching our weight", no more, no less. I think Fowler is in the same category, it's just our weight has fallen slightly. I think he deserves another crack at it, I'd rather support a club who develops a young manager rather than gives him the bullet at the first sign of trouble.

I'd fully understand if the board opted to let him go though. They've got a tough decision to make.

[Monkey Tennis]

It's ridiculously harsh to make Pickard some sort of scapegoat. Aside from his age, he's only recently come into the team and been man of the match in some of his appearances. If we are to use his inclusion to somehow be representative of the managers mentality I'd suggest it shows his willingness to try different things having realised what we're doing isn't working.

Sadly it appears he is unable to extract consistent or entertaining performances out of the squad no matter what he tries. This doesn't reflect well on him, but having expected a tough and ultimately fruitless season in the summer it does seem very harsh to sack him for delivering precisely that.

Although I've rejected the suggestion in the past I suppose the Gus comparison is only natural. Both had a major rebuilding job to do, and both produced pretty insipid performances on the park. Fowler isn't going to get us relegated though and Gus didn't provide anything like the success of last season so for me the comparison ends there. Macpherson stuck with the same underperforming personnel and seemed to hold this stubborn belief that his methods were working. Fowler at least seems to recognise the problems we have. Although as I've already said his inability to do anything about them is where he slips up.

The main complaint held against Jim McIntyre was that he had us "punching our weight", no more, no less. I think Fowler is in the same category, it's just our weight has fallen slightly. I think he deserves another crack at it, I'd rather support a club who develops a young manager rather than gives him the bullet at the first sign of trouble.

I'd fully understand if the board opted to let him go though. They've got a tough decision to make.

All pretty fair.

I don't like the 'mind set' of the teams we field, if that makes sense. I think it's typified by the extent of time wasting we indulge in, late in games if we're doing ok scorewise.

I think that Fowler's instincts are naturally conservative.

He's got us in the table, in a place that might have been anticipated. It's far from disastrous and perhaps, as a young manager, he deserves a longer run at it. The Cup record doesn't help his case though.

He doesn't inspire any hope in me that we'll be enterprising and ambitious on his watch so I wouldn't be opposed to a switch. He'd maybe be justified in feeling a little hard done by if that happened though.

[RUSTY1111]

It's ridiculously harsh to make Pickard some sort of scapegoat. Aside from his age, he's only recently come into the team and been man of the match in some of his appearances. If we are to use his inclusion to somehow be representative of the managers mentality I'd suggest it shows his willingness to try different things having realised what we're doing isn't working.

Sadly it appears he is unable to extract consistent or entertaining performances out of the squad no matter what he tries. This doesn't reflect well on him, but having expected a tough and ultimately fruitless season in the summer it does seem very harsh to sack him for delivering precisely that.

Although I've rejected the suggestion in the past I suppose the Gus comparison is only natural. Both had a major rebuilding job to do, and both produced pretty insipid performances on the park. Fowler isn't going to get us relegated though and Gus didn't provide anything like the success of last season so for me the comparison ends there. Macpherson stuck with the same underperforming personnel and seemed to hold this stubborn belief that his methods were working. Fowler at least seems to recognise the problems we have. Although as I've already said his inability to do anything about them is where he slips up.

The main complaint held against Jim McIntyre was that he had us "punching our weight", no more, no less. I think Fowler is in the same category, it's just our weight has fallen slightly. I think he deserves another crack at it, I'd rather support a club who develops a young manager rather than gives him the bullet at the first sign of trouble.

I'd fully understand if the board opted to let him go though. They've got a tough decision to make.

I think the fact that the last few managers at Queens have jumped ship to Premiership clubs does reflect the nature of the club but Queens should be trying to get some stability management wise for a little longer at least. Having seen Fowler at Kilmarnock as a player for his whole spell there, I reckon he deserves longer. After all the personnel changes I reckon Queens are exactly where everyone thought they'd be at this stage of the season.

[Broony88]

It's ridiculously harsh to make Pickard some sort of scapegoat. Aside from his age, he's only recently come into the team and been man of the match in some of his appearances. If we are to use his inclusion to somehow be representative of the managers mentality I'd suggest it shows his willingness to try different things having realised what we're doing isn't working.

Sadly it appears he is unable to extract consistent or entertaining performances out of the squad no matter what he tries. This doesn't reflect well on him, but having expected a tough and ultimately fruitless season in the summer it does seem very harsh to sack him for delivering precisely that.

Although I've rejected the suggestion in the past I suppose the Gus comparison is only natural. Both had a major rebuilding job to do, and both produced pretty insipid performances on the park. Fowler isn't going to get us relegated though and Gus didn't provide anything like the success of last season so for me the comparison ends there. Macpherson stuck with the same underperforming personnel and seemed to hold this stubborn belief that his methods were working. Fowler at least seems to recognise the problems we have. Although as I've already said his inability to do anything about them is where he slips up.

The main complaint held against Jim McIntyre was that he had us "punching our weight", no more, no less. I think Fowler is in the same category, it's just our weight has fallen slightly. I think he deserves another crack at it, I'd rather support a club who develops a young manager rather than gives him the bullet at the first sign of trouble.

I'd fully understand if the board opted to let him go though. They've got a tough decision to make.

I don't really see where I have made Pickard a scapegoat for the results, the blame lies solely for me with Fowlers dreadful boring set up. There is no getting away from the fact that Pickard is never in a million years going to fire us to fourth though and with Lyle missing we are even more reliant on Russell and yesterday I can't even remember a time where they linked up.

[Guest Flash]

Imo Fowler's problem in addressing any issues we have is to become even more cautious. I'm not having a go at Pickard, but he seems to have taken on the role Fowler first tried with Kidd against Hibs, although in a slightly different way. It is more or less to allow him to have an extra defensive midfielder without having to bring on a sub.

The position we are in the league isn't unexpected. The way we have played most of our games has taken me by surprise, though. I honestly didn't think Fowler was the type to prefer a borefest, but he most definitely is. As others have said, when the scoreline is favourable, including if we are drawing against the better teams, more often than not we stop attacking. The feeling I get is that Fowler's ideal season would consist of winning every home game 1-0 and drawing every away game 0-0.

I'm really not sure why it is so different with his own team compared to the one he inherited. Is it really solely as a result of not having Reilly, McShane and Carmichael? If it is the case that he has revealed his true colurs and this is how he wants football to be played, then I don't think giving him more time is the answer because it'll only get worse. However, only he knows how he wants the game to be played. And although he quite often says the right things, the approach on the pitch is somewhat different from his chat.

[QosLoyal]

I think fowler will absolutely be here next season .He will get another crack at building a team capable of challenging for the play offs and i think thats when he will get judged by the board.We have lost a few very decent players which has been stated numerous times. It was always going to be a difficult season. But the fact is the football has been eye bleedingly poor. Is it too much to ask to have more than 2 shots in a game? At no point yesterday did I think we would win even going one nil up I thought we would succumb to defeat and we did. There is no urgency in the team everything is so slow and dull . I was hoping the two cup performances v Livi and morton were going to be one offs but sadly they were the standard that we have become used to this season. Hibs on Tuesday there confidence will have taken a dent after back to back defeats we should be going out and testing them, but sadly I think fowler will try to get a point from it at best. Striking wise we rely on beany and lyle way too much, just dont know where the goals will come from if they dont play.Pretty depressing stuff.

Edited February 28, 2016 by QosLoyal