Jump to content

Greenock Morton v Dumbarton 21/10/17


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Disappointing that Barr's chance isn't there, it was the most clear cut chance in the second half other than Morton's goal.

Still doesn't look like a deliberate handball to me. Dowie goes to sleep as does McLaughlin and Wardrop is left trying to track McHugh's run. Really disappointing because we defended well and Gallacher had a decent game. Our goal is a complete lol, f**k knows what Morton were playing at there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably Duffy and Aitken were smoking crack in the manager's office before conducting the press interviews, as they bizarrely felt that the current Morton team are some sort of dominant, breathtaking side, as opposed to the 'disjointed, mediocre omnishambles' being witnessed  from the terraces. The flaw of having an immobile Harkins trying to protect our defence alongside Murdoch alone was flagged before the game by yours truly, and was demonstrated by the number of times that Dumbarton broke without any sort of resistance until they reached our back four. When that happens on a regular basis then both the errors and the resulting lack of confidence that we've seen from our full-backs and Gaston throughout this season will show themselves again, and were demonstrated at Dumbarton's goal. We could easily have been more than a goal down from that rancid first-half showing. We then created enough chances and had enough pressure to have turned the game around in the second half, but can have no complaints about not picking up three points given how abject we were in the first half.  Oliver looked more effective than any game since his bad injury at Palmerston in February, which at least offers some hope that improved performances and results could be around the corner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Presumably Duffy and Aitken were smoking crack in the manager's office before conducting the press interviews, as they bizarrely felt that the current Morton team are some sort of dominant, breathtaking side, as opposed to the 'disjointed, mediocre omnishambles' being witnessed  from the terraces. The flaw of having an immobile Harkins trying to protect our defence alongside Murdoch alone was flagged before the game by yours truly, and was demonstrated by the number of times that Dumbarton broke without any sort of resistance until they reached our back four. When that happens on a regular basis then both the errors and the resulting lack of confidence that we've seen from our full-backs and Gaston throughout this season will show themselves again, and were demonstrated at Dumbarton's goal. We could easily have been more than a goal down from that rancid first-half showing. We then created enough chances and had enough pressure to have turned the game around in the second half, but can have no complaints about not picking up three points given how abject we were in the first half.  Oliver looked more effective than any game since his bad injury at Palmerston in February, which at least offers some hope that improved performances and results could be around the corner. 

The goal had nothing at all to do with a lack of confidence. It smacked of a lack of concentration and positional awareness from both full backs, if  not pure incompetence. Neither was under any pressure. The Rangers goal last year and this one shows that Doyle’s poor distribution and lack of recovery pace means  he simply cannot be trusted to go forward without someone tracking back to cover the gap. That though is not Harkins job. A solution might be to play Tiffoney ahead of Doyle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When a full-back is level with the Dumbarton box and has a poor cross cleared, then it is absolutely the job of a central midfielder to read the situation and get back to cover the vast, 80 yard space on the right flank that Dumbarton were able to exploit.  Harkins is not mobile enough to do that job and so shouldn't be playing directly in front of the back four, least of all in a midfield two.  Thanks for playing anyway champ, and have a red dot for your floundering effort.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, virginton said:

When a full-back is level with the Dumbarton box and has a poor cross cleared, then it is absolutely the job of a central midfielder to read the situation and get back to cover the vast, 80 yard space on the right flank that Dumbarton were able to exploit.  Harkins is not mobile enough to do that job and so shouldn't be playing directly in front of the back four, least of all in a midfield two.  Thanks for playing anyway champ, and have a red dot for your floundering effort.  

When exactly should this CENTRAL midfielder, whose main objective would have been to support the forward move and look for any central second ball,  have been expected to have read the breakdown of the move and charge of into a backward wide position on the right as you suggest? The simple fact is that Doyle needs defensive cover before he charges forward,  not from Harkins, but from a mobile wide man or he doesn’t charge forward at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the central second ball doesn't come to pass - and it didn't - then the onus is on a central midfielder to immediately retreat to reform the defensive line, which on Saturday was a back four. Then Dumbarton can't immediately break through on the empty space on the right hand side, then Doyle has time to return to his starting position., then the central midfielder also returns to his starting position, all of which can be conducted while goal side of the ball.

Perhaps there is a 'Football Tactics for Dinosaur Fans' book to assist you, if you have any further basic queries or bewildering  suggestions when 'have mobile and competent central midfielders' has been the correct answer to the problem for at least twenty years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, virginton said:

If the central second ball doesn't come to pass - and it didn't - then the onus is on a central midfielder to immediately retreat to reform the defensive line, which on Saturday was a back four. Then Dumbarton can't immediately break through on the empty space on the right hand side, then Doyle has time to return to his starting position., then the central midfielder also returns to his starting position, all of which can be conducted while goal side of the ball.

Perhaps there is a 'Football Tactics for Dinosaur Fans' book to assist you, if you have any further basic queries or bewildering  suggestions when 'have mobile and competent central midfielders' has been the correct answer to the problem for at least twenty years. 

In the context of what happened in this instance the only possible covering option we had was the right sided centre back. Your notion that it was somehow Harkins responsibility is absurd. You clearly have no awareness of angles or speed and are simply blinded by your own innate desire to have someone to bitch about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Branch Ton said:

In the context of what happened in this instance the only possible covering option we had was the right sided centre back. Your notion that it was somehow Harkins responsibility is absurd. You clearly have no awareness of angles or speed and are simply blinded by your own innate desire to have someone to bitch about. 

Just to be clear, you don't think it's reasonable to expect central midfielders to provide cover on a wing when the opposition counter attack after winning possession when a full-back is on the edge of their box?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

^^^

^^^ idiot found

A right-sided centre-back moving across would only provide 'cover', by instead opening up an even more dangerous gap in the centre of the defensive line. The central midfielders were within ten yards of the halfway line and yet failed to cover the clear gap in the defensive line. They were incapable of doing so for about the first fifty minutes of that game, which is why Dumbarton could break up the park with ease. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Just to be clear, you don't think it's reasonable to expect central midfielders to provide cover on a wing when the opposition counter attack after winning possession when a full-back is on the edge of their box?

I didn’t say that as a matter of principle. I suggested that in the context of this goal the attributon of blame  should be Doyle, Russell, Gaston , right sided centre back in that order, Then Duffy for his team set up and seemingly allowing Doyle carte Blanche to charge forward at will, but certainly not Harkins. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really have an issue with sacrificing energy for creativity in central midfield against a team like Dumbarton that are always going to sit in and frustrate. Mobility in the middle of the park wasn't really a problem. The problem was that our shape was laughable. The 4 across the front just got in each other's way all game.

For the goal the whole team decided to overcommit, blaming it solely on Harkins is a bit simple

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...