Warriors vs Sons

[O'Kelly Isley III]

6 minutes ago, GordyBrow said:

That’s interesting, I was sure he tried to buy one, but I was a long way from the incident.

We are such a frustrating team to watch and it really says something that this is (to this point of the season) the most successful team I’ve seen over a league season and I don’t really like the team at all.

I think Faz made a big mistake by throwing an extra defender on. We’d already lost any sense of control in midfield and hauling off a midfielder for a defender meant we ceded all control of the midfield to Stenny, at which point we suffered wave upon wave of attack.

A good post, and your last paragraph demonstrates that if you repeatedly try to see out narrow leads then you are going to have your arse bitten at some point.  This result has been coming for a long time.

But what annoyed me most was that for 70 minutes Stenny were pedestrian and unimaginative yet we contrived to turn them into an attacking force by a combination of backfiring substitutions and dare I say it, a degree of arrogance - fist pumps and whoops should be kept firmly in check for the final whistle.

Yet there were things to like in our play, we passed the ball well at times and for that opening 70 minutes we managed the game pretty well.  And once again Ryan Wallace worked the opposition centre backs and linked the play very intelligently - you begin to wonder just what could be achieved with someone alongside him.

Stirling dropping points today is welcome but I'll be looking for much more in an attacking sense next week at home to Annan to fully put today behind us 

 

[cedrick1]

Hopefully some common sense on here rather than facey??

I thought overall we deserved to win and only in the last 10 minutes did we lose our game plan and put ourselves under pressure. Don’t think stenny had a shot in target till then?

Game management . 93rd minute throw in high up park and we throw it straight out for a goal kick. Jeez throw to someone’s feet and at very least lose a throw in . That’s my only complaint.

prior to the game a lot of mention about how tough a game it was going to be. It wasnt

saw a post about seeing Byrne and mclean on together. Think about it ain’t gonna happen . And wallace doesn’t deserve to be left out 

I see it as a point gained but so close to being 3 

[Am Featha Taigh Nan Clach]

Safe to say I disagree with @cedrick1!

I though Stenhousemuir were slightly the better team for the last 35 mins of the first half and Dumbarton slightly the better team for the first 30/35 mins of the second half.

We didn't create many clear cut chances and a late goal often makes a team seem lucky/unlucky but on the balance of play a draw was fair.

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by Am Featha Taigh Nan Clach

[cedrick1]

9 minutes ago, Am Featha *****h Nan Clach said:

Safe to say I disagree with @cedrick1!

I though Stenhousemuir were slightly the better team for the last 35 mins of the first half and Dumbarton slightly the better team for the first 30/35 mins of the first half.

We didn't create many clear cut chances and a late goal often makes a team seem lucky/unlucky but on the balance of play a draw was fair.

 

Long first half

[Am Featha Taigh Nan Clach]

12 minutes ago, cedrick1 said:

Long first half

Duly edited. Less of your cheek cedrick

[ZX1886]

Attended yesterday as a neutral as Larbert is less than 15 minutes on the train for me. 
Thought a point in the end was fair. Dumbarton were good right at the start of both halves but was expecting a bit more from the league leaders. 

Decent away support through from Dumbarton, home stand looked pretty full too. Anyone got the attendance? 

[squeezebox-son]

Have to echo what some others have said. A point when Stirling got a point is ultimately fine, but definitely an opportunity missed!

What the guys were doing in the corner just throwing the ball out for a goal kick 1 minute before the goal ended up in is beyond me! It looked like they 3 guys that were up that way didn't know what to do and I feel if Wallace had still been on, that's the kind of situation he would have taken control of and kept the guys right.

I didn't agree with bringing Grant on and it felt like it was needless. As mentioned above, we haven't been struggling to hold out this season (I know some games have been harder to hold on etc but we have won by defending well with the back 4 we had on the park today) so why did he feel we needed to sacrifice anything from further up the park and play a back 5?

I so feel he may shuffle the pack a little bit next week. It felt a bit like a defeat and we know Faz is big on continuity and not changing a winning side, but we could be doing with making a change or 2 in the midfield.

Rusty didn't convince me today that he will offer that much up front on his own either. Wallace actually won more headers, harassed the defenders and is a much more intelligent (and experienced) player. Trying them together may just allow them both to show their best.

Also, is Byrne actually fit or not?

[The Moonster]

5 hours ago, squeezebox-son said:

Have to echo what some others have said. A point when Stirling got a point is ultimately fine, but definitely an opportunity missed!

What the guys were doing in the corner just throwing the ball out for a goal kick 1 minute before the goal ended up in is beyond me! It looked like they 3 guys that were up that way didn't know what to do and I feel if Wallace had still been on, that's the kind of situation he would have taken control of and kept the guys right.

I didn't agree with bringing Grant on and it felt like it was needless. As mentioned above, we haven't been struggling to hold out this season (I know some games have been harder to hold on etc but we have won by defending well with the back 4 we had on the park today) so why did he feel we needed to sacrifice anything from further up the park and play a back 5?

I so feel he may shuffle the pack a little bit next week. It felt a bit like a defeat and we know Faz is big on continuity and not changing a winning side, but we could be doing with making a change or 2 in the midfield.

Rusty didn't convince me today that he will offer that much up front on his own either. Wallace actually won more headers, harassed the defenders and is a much more intelligent (and experienced) player. Trying them together may just allow them both to show their best.

Also, is Byrne actually fit or not?

A bit harsh to judge Rusty when he was on the park for about 8 minutes. 

[cedrick1]

21 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

A bit harsh to judge Rusty when he was on the park for about 8 minutes. 

Sorry I disagree. I compared it to early in the season when we used John gemmell for short spells and he was effective. Rusty has to at least win a few balls and hold ball up . Yesterday he did neither so what is point in brining him on . 

[The Moonster]

14 minutes ago, cedrick1 said:

Sorry I disagree. I compared it to early in the season when we used John gemmell for short spells and he was effective. Rusty has to at least win a few balls and hold ball up . Yesterday he did neither so what is point in brining him on . 

The guys barely played in months and is only being thrown on when Wallace can't run any more. Let him get up to speed and maybe start a couple of games before we start demanding more from him. 

[O'Kelly Isley III]

40 minutes ago, cedrick1 said:

Sorry I disagree. I compared it to early in the season when we used John gemmell for short spells and he was effective. Rusty has to at least win a few balls and hold ball up . Yesterday he did neither so what is point in brining him on . 

In the last couple of games there's been a more general issue with substitutions.  By the time the two McLeans and Finlay Gray have come on the momentum had already swung to the opposition and the subs made virtually no difference. 

We got away with it last week but removing a further midfielder to introduce Grant upset the defensive shape and further invited Stenny to come at us.

[Boghead ranter]

6 hours ago, squeezebox-son said:

What the guys were doing in the corner just throwing the ball out for a goal kick 1 minute before the goal ended up in is beyond me! It looked like they 3 guys that were up that way didn't know what to do and I feel if Wallace had still been on, that's the kind of situation he would have taken control of and kept the guys right.

Re this - Carswell was right in front of where I was sitting when the throw was awarded, and he shouted to Lynas, McLean and the other (canny mind who it was) "Throw it to feet and keep it".

Lynas threw it low, and neither of the other 2 seemed to bother going for it, maybe because they left it to each other.  McLean was definitely the intended target, based on where Lynas threw it, though.

[Jan Vojáček]

8 hours ago, ZX1886 said:

Attended yesterday as a neutral as Larbert is less than 15 minutes on the train for me. 
Thought a point in the end was fair. Dumbarton were good right at the start of both halves but was expecting a bit more from the league leaders. 

Decent away support through from Dumbarton, home stand looked pretty full too. Anyone got the attendance? 

Only 422 apparently. I thought it would be a wee bit more than that. The home stand looked pretty much full and we must've had 100 odd there at least.

7 hours ago, squeezebox-son said:

Also, is Byrne actually fit or not?

He's fit as in not injured. But not fit as in match sharp.

Faz said the other week he wanted to get a bounce game sorted to play him in. If we'd been 2/3-0 up in the last few games then I think he would've chucked him on to get some minutes in the legs, but it's been so tight I doubt he's wanted to risk it.

Hopefully we see him back soon though. We don't really have another player like him in the squad and, imo, he's the best finisher we have. Although how you fit Wallace, McLean and Byrne into a side I have absolutely no idea.

[Neilly]

A draw was definitely the correct result. Dumbarton never really showed much authority throughout the game or created enough chances to deservedly win the contest, I always felt we were well in the game. 

We were the better team first half and didn't deserve to be behind at the break but we didn't really come out firing again until the last 15/20 minutes of the game. Dumbarton had a few slick moves in that time but never really troubled Lyle. That's three league games Lyle has had and we still don't really know how good he is as he's been well protected and hasn't made a notable save.

Dumbarton's negativity actually cost them in the end. For all the time wasting and then putting widden legs Grant on to shore up the defence further they invited us on really and got what they deserved. Rusty looked very heavy and was dominated by Nicky Jamieson so they had no out ball either for that last period of the game. Once fit though he will come good and get them over the line for the title, particularly with Stirling Albion now having g lost Fotheringham.

It's an old cliche but there is a real 'never say die' attitude about us since Naysmith came in. As much as that's been great I still feel a bit frustrated that we are so far away from the top two. What might have been with a proper manager in charge of this squad and budget at the start of the season. No team in this league are particularly good.

Still undefeated under Naysmith thought so onwards and upwards. Forfar are flying but we go there with a bit of expectancy rather than hope that we can turn them over.

[O'Kelly Isley III]

27 minutes ago, Jan Vojáček said:

Only 422 apparently. I thought it would be a wee bit more than that. The home stand looked pretty much full and we must've had 100 odd there at least.

He's fit as in not injured. But not fit as in match sharp.

Faz said the other week he wanted to get a bounce game sorted to play him in. If we'd been 2/3-0 up in the last few games then I think he would've chucked him on to get some minutes in the legs, but it's been so tight I doubt he's wanted to risk it.

Hopefully we see him back soon though. We don't really have another player like him in the squad and, imo, he's the best finisher we have. Although how you fit Wallace, McLean and Byrne into a side I have absolutely no idea.

That attendance figure seems on the low side to me.....  

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

2 hours ago, cedrick1 said:

Sorry I disagree. I compared it to early in the season when we used John gemmell for short spells and he was effective. Rusty has to at least win a few balls and hold ball up . Yesterday he did neither so what is point in brining him on . 

I don’t really think holding the ball up is McLean’s game, and most reviews from fans of other teams say the same thing - he isn’t much of a presence in the air. Wallace isn’t exactly Mo Farrah so I’m assuming the point of bringing McLean on is because he’s blowing oot his hoop and McLean desperately needs minutes.

Personally I’d like to see us start both of them but with the ghosts of Forthbank still lingering then I’m almost certain Farrell wont dare attempt it. He’ll stick with the same players, in the same positions until we get beat unfortunately.

[squeezebox-son]

1 hour ago, Boghead ranter said:

Re this - Carswell was right in front of where I was sitting when the throw was awarded, and he shouted to Lynas, McLean and the other (canny mind who it was) "Throw it to feet and keep it".

Lynas threw it low, and neither of the other 2 seemed to bother going for it, maybe because they left it to each other.  McLean was definitely the intended target, based on where Lynas threw it, though.

Yeah, it just looked like they had no idea what each other was meant to do and it could have been the difference in preventing Stenny getting up and winning the corner straight from the goal kick. Even if the ball had gone out for a throw in to them in the corner, they wouldn't have been able to break so quickly.

3 hours ago, The Moonster said:

A bit harsh to judge Rusty when he was on the park for about 8 minutes. 

I didn't think I was that harsh on him to be honest. Just didn't think he offered us the out ball we desperately needed at that time and looks a bit of a headless chicken at times. The main point I was making is that I think both would thrive off having each other on the pitch, and hopefully after conceding the late goal yesterday Faz may consider shuffling the pack a bit. Especially if we have Byrne also looking for minutes then it isn't like we only have 2 striking option (if we needed extra legs etc we would also still have Ross McLean. 

[Francesc Fabregas]

I really enjoyed yesterday's game. Although it was low on goalmouth action, it was an absorbing contest between two decent sides and a draw was the fairest outcome. Other than a 10-minute spell at the beginning of each half, I thought Stenhousemuir were the better side, knocking the ball around well and enjoying long spells of possession. albeit without ever threatening.  That's twice I've seen Dumbarton this season and I haven't been particularly impressed by them but they're a big side, a cynical side, and they'll have the know-how to win the title. There are a lot of dislikable players in their ranks but that's all part of the fun, isn't it?

When Peter Grant was brought on, I wondered about the merits of sacrificing control in the middle of the park for an extra defender but, ultimately, if you're not going to pick up your opponent's best attacker inside the penalty box, you're going to be in bother. Matty Yates' goal was one of the best moments of the season (which says a lot about how the campaign's gone so far) and there really does appear to be a good feeling about the club since Gary Naysmith has come in. Neilly's right, it's difficult not to look at the table and feel disappointed because with the money spent on this team, and the quality of the sides around us, we should really be challenging for the title. Instead, we're looking to sneak into the play-off places - it's not ideal but it's doable.

As an aside, I thought the referee was pretty poor. There are a number of questionable calls for both sides but the decision to book Adam Corbett five minutes into the match for fouling Gregg Wylde after a slip baffled me. That's lower-league Scottish football, baby!

[squeezebox-son]

50 minutes ago, Francesc Fabregas said:

I really enjoyed yesterday's game. Although it was low on goalmouth action, it was an absorbing contest between two decent sides and a draw was the fairest outcome. Other than a 10-minute spell at the beginning of each half, I thought Stenhousemuir were the better side, knocking the ball around well and enjoying long spells of possession. albeit without ever threatening.  That's twice I've seen Dumbarton this season and I haven't been particularly impressed by them but they're a big side, a cynical side, and they'll have the know-how to win the title. There are a lot of dislikable players in their ranks but that's all part of the fun, isn't it?

When Peter Grant was brought on, I wondered about the merits of sacrificing control in the middle of the park for an extra defender but, ultimately, if you're not going to pick up your opponent's best attacker inside the penalty box, you're going to be in bother. Matty Yates' goal was one of the best moments of the season (which says a lot about how the campaign's gone so far) and there really does appear to be a good feeling about the club since Gary Naysmith has come in. Neilly's right, it's difficult not to look at the table and feel disappointed because with the money spent on this team, and the quality of the sides around us, we should really be challenging for the title. Instead, we're looking to sneak into the play-off places - it's not ideal but it's doable.

As an aside, I thought the referee was pretty poor. There are a number of questionable calls for both sides but the decision to book Adam Corbett five minutes into the match for fouling Gregg Wylde after a slip baffled me. That's lower-league Scottish football, baby!

We really aren't that big a side and im not sure what you mean by cynical. When we brought on Russell McLean I commented on how he is huge compared to the rest of our team.

I thought Stenny were throwing it about a bit yesterday and another ref would have given a fair amount more and a few yellows too. But, the one we had was a bit strange and inconsistent...  At least that's one thing we can agree on 

Also, why were the celebrations and in particular the players and ball boys so keen to GIRUY to our fans?  We hadn't given any of them a particularly hard time and it seemed a bit excessive the way they acted.

[Nigel Blackwell]

I wasn’t at the game but was surprised when I saw the attendance was only 400. The stand holds over 600.

We played Livingston in the cup and the stand was full. They brought a fair few on the terrace but the official crowd was given as 900.