Sons' sorrow

[Howlin' Wilf]

I think oor Dom will be some way down the pecking order at Killie given their current run of form and midfield options. Hope I’m right as an extension  of his loan to the end of the season would be a huge boost

Just been messaging back and forth with a friend of mine who’s a Killie fan. She reckons that they’ll be quite amenable to Thomas staying for the season. She says he’s nowhere near their first team or bench at the moment.

[Boghead ranter]

2 hours ago, Howlin' Wilf said:

Just been messaging back and forth with a friend of mine who’s a Killie fan. She reckons that they’ll be quite amenable to Thomas staying for the season. She says he’s nowhere near their first team or bench at the moment.

Works at Morrisons, Kilmarnock fish counter?

 

https://my.morrisons.com/storefinder/117

Edited November 13, 2018 by Boghead ranter

[Howlin' Wilf]

I can think of players, going back to Alan Kay and Tom Coyle whom the fans didn’t rate but the manager(s) did. In fairly recent (for an old git anyway) memory the two who spring to mind are John Dillon and Stevie Bonar. Then there were fans favourites whom, for whatever reason, wouldn’t get picked. Craig Brittain and Bryan Prunty for example. It’s clear that Kyle Hutton is in the former category. As has been pointed out on the Forfar thread, there are players to cover for him but both Aitken and Duffy prefer an unfit Hutton to fit alternatives. Why is this?

[Howlin' Wilf]

I can think of players, going back to Alan Kay and Tom Coyle whom the fans didn’t rate but the manager(s) did. In fairly recent (for an old git anyway) memory the two who spring to mind are John Dillon and Stevie Bonar. Then there were fans favourites whom, for whatever reason, wouldn’t get picked. Craig Brittain and Bryan Prunty for example. It’s clear that Kyle Hutton is in the former category. As has been pointed out on the Forfar thread, there are players to cover for him but both Aitken and Duffy prefer an unfit Hutton to fit alternatives. Why is this?

I just remembered that at the time he was Sons boss, I used to bump into Murdo in Helensburgh and we’d chat about how Sons were doing. One day I asked him if Charlie Gibson was injured as he wasn’t playing. His reply was that the Sons legend Colin McKinnon was a better player.........

[Benito Robles]

1 hour ago, Howlin' Wilf said:

I can think of players, going back to Alan Kay and Tom Coyle whom the fans didn’t rate but the manager(s) did. In fairly recent (for an old git anyway) memory the two who spring to mind are John Dillon and Stevie Bonar. Then there were fans favourites whom, for whatever reason, wouldn’t get picked. Craig Brittain and Bryan Prunty for example. It’s clear that Kyle Hutton is in the former category. As has been pointed out on the Forfar thread, there are players to cover for him but both Aitken and Duffy prefer an unfit Hutton to fit alternatives. Why is this?

We have/had the same problems at Clydebank. Some fans immediately for whatever reason take a dislike to a player and no matter what they do, it will never be good enough, but yet managers continue to pick them for their starting eleven. I take the view that maybe the coaches know better as they work with them in training and can see things from a professional point of view. You mention Tommy Coyle.  My friend, sadly no longer with us, hated the fact that Coyle played for the Bankies and simply couldn't see his value to any team that featured his selection. I always thought that for the time he was at Kilbowie he was decent. All about opinions!

[The Moonster]

1 hour ago, Howlin' Wilf said:

I can think of players, going back to Alan Kay and Tom Coyle whom the fans didn’t rate but the manager(s) did. In fairly recent (for an old git anyway) memory the two who spring to mind are John Dillon and Stevie Bonar. Then there were fans favourites whom, for whatever reason, wouldn’t get picked. Craig Brittain and Bryan Prunty for example. It’s clear that Kyle Hutton is in the former category. As has been pointed out on the Forfar thread, there are players to cover for him but both Aitken and Duffy prefer an unfit Hutton to fit alternatives. Why is this?

Kyle Hutton is obviously a player who does well in training and (as evidenced this season) makes himself available to play when he's not perhaps fully fit, when some other members of the squad seem to be out injured as soon as a strong wind blows.  I understand why managers like him in that respect, but for me he doesn't offer anywhere near enough during games.  Jim Duffy would quite rightly ask at this point, "what the f**k do you know?" which would be valid, but I would throw that back at Jim and ask him what he thinks Hutton offers. Hutton has excellent passing ability, of that there is no doubt. But he moves like an old milk truck and is pretty awful at tackling.  He's scored 2 goals in 228 career appearances, both goals for Rangers in the 3rd Division (where the majority of his Rangers appearances came). There aren't enough strings to his bow for me.

Of all the clubs he's played for, the only set of fans who had good things to say about him were Queen of the South, that earned him a move to St Mirren where he was universally hated, passed on to Airdrie who couldn't wait to see the back of him and now he's at us drawing the same sort of comments. I genuinely think if he hadn't came through at Rangers he'd be playing League 2. 

[Boghead ranter]

3 hours ago, Howlin' Wilf said:

I can think of players, going back to Alan Kay and Tom Coyle whom the fans didn’t rate but the manager(s) did. In fairly recent (for an old git anyway) memory the two who spring to mind are John Dillon and Stevie Bonar. Then there were fans favourites whom, for whatever reason, wouldn’t get picked. Craig Brittain and Bryan Prunty for example. It’s clear that Kyle Hutton is in the former category. As has been pointed out on the Forfar thread, there are players to cover for him but both Aitken and Duffy prefer an unfit Hutton to fit alternatives. Why is this?

We also had fans who hated Owen Coyle when he broke through, just because they already hated Joe and Tommy, and "aw naw, here's another wan""

What's Owen Coyle's cumulative  career transfer fees again? And we had terracing experts who wrote him off as being crap.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Boghead ranter

[untitled00]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

Kyle Hutton is obviously a player who does well in training and (as evidenced this season) makes himself available to play when he's not perhaps fully fit, when some other members of the squad seem to be out injured as soon as a strong wind blows.  I understand why managers like him in that respect, but for me he doesn't offer anywhere near enough during games.  Jim Duffy would quite rightly ask at this point, "what the f**k do you know?" which would be valid, but I would throw that back at Jim and ask him what he thinks Hutton offers. Hutton has excellent passing ability, of that there is no doubt. But he moves like an old milk truck and is pretty awful at tackling.  He's scored 2 goals in 228 career appearances, both goals for Rangers in the 3rd Division (where the majority of his Rangers appearances came). There aren't enough strings to his bow for me.

Of all the clubs he's played for, the only set of fans who had good things to say about him were Queen of the South, that earned him a move to St Mirren where he was universally hated, passed on to Airdrie who couldn't wait to see the back of him and now he's at us drawing the same sort of comments. I genuinely think if he hadn't came through at Rangers he'd be playing League 2. 

I'd suspect the fact that Stuart Carswell's only contribution on Saturday was to pass the ball to the opposition  every time he touched it likely has a something to do with it. You can argue that Huttons passing (while decent) isn't particularly incisive or creative (and you would be right in that analysis), but when the alternative is someone who literally gives the ball away - what would you choose? Our ball retention this season has been one of our biggest failings, I'm not sure taking away the one player in central midfield who has actually been keeping the ball is the way to go...

I definitely think some of our fans have blind spot for Carswell but every issue with Hutton is pored over and analysed in detail. With that being said I do think when on form Carswell is the more useful player and ideally we should be looking for midfield pairing of Carswell/Forbes perhaps to give us a better balance between defence and attack after Christmas.

The problem with that idea is that right now Carswell has not been playing well (has arguably been mixed form wise for over a year now - another point that is somewhat ignored by our fans while Hutton is regularly lambasted) and although I do think Carswell can offer more - at the minute Hutton is playing better (or less worse - depending on how  you wish to view it). 

Your comment about him getting game time as an ex-Rangers player works both ways - particularly when Brad Spencer & Stuart Carswell (who were both rotten on Saturday) escape criticism, presumably because they haven't played for Rangers previously. Its a 2 way street. 

Edited November 14, 2018 by untitled00

[Jan Vojáček]

12 minutes ago, untitled00 said:

I'd suspect the fact that Stuart Carswell's only contribution on Saturday was to pass the ball to the opposition  every time he touched it likely has a something to do with it. You can argue that Huttons passing (while decent) isn't particularly incisive or creative (and you would be right in that analysis), but when the alternative is someone who literally gives the ball away - what would you choose? Our ball retention this season has been one of our biggest failings, I'm not sure taking away the one player in central midfield who has actually been keeping the ball is the way to go...

I definitely think some of our fans have blind spot for Carswell but every issue with Hutton is pored over and analysed in detail. With that being said I do think when on form Carswell is the more useful player and ideally we should be looking for midfield pairing of Carswell/Forbes perhaps to give us a better balance between defence and attack after Christmas.

The problem with that idea is that right now Carswell has not been playing well (has arguably been mixed form wise for over a year now - another point that is somewhat ignored by our fans while Hutton is regularly lambasted) and although I do think Carswell can offer more - at the minute Hutton is playing better (or less worse - depending on how  you wish to view it). 

Your comment about him getting game time as an ex-Rangers player works both ways - particularly when Brad Spencer & Stuart Carswell (who were both rotten on Saturday) escape criticism, presumably because they haven't played for Rangers previously. Its a 2 way street. 

I genuinely think that's down to pairing him with Hutton (this works both ways to be fair to Hutton, he was often at his best when Carsy wasn't alongside him). It's like playing with two goalkeepers, or two right-backs. They just get in the way of each other, both need a creative player alongside them. Not a clone.

If we ever do move Forbes into central midfield it has to be alongside Carsy though. He needs someone with legs alongside him, and Hutton isn't that man.

What I'm going to say next will get me ridiculed, but what the heck.

I think Kyle Hutton would be better suited to playing football in the Spanish third division than Scottish third tier. Give him a bit of time and space on the ball and he'll do a really good job, make it 100 miles and hour, with folk barreling into tackles and charging about and he gets lost.

Obviously we don't see what goes on in training, but I'll bet that in that environment he's absolutely superb.

[The Moonster]

1 hour ago, untitled00 said:

I'd suspect the fact that Stuart Carswell's only contribution on Saturday was to pass the ball to the opposition  every time he touched it likely has a something to do with it. You can argue that Huttons passing (while decent) isn't particularly incisive or creative (and you would be right in that analysis), but when the alternative is someone who literally gives the ball away - what would you choose? Our ball retention this season has been one of our biggest failings, I'm not sure taking away the one player in central midfield who has actually been keeping the ball is the way to go...

I definitely think some of our fans have blind spot for Carswell but every issue with Hutton is pored over and analysed in detail. With that being said I do think when on form Carswell is the more useful player and ideally we should be looking for midfield pairing of Carswell/Forbes perhaps to give us a better balance between defence and attack after Christmas.

The problem with that idea is that right now Carswell has not been playing well (has arguably been mixed form wise for over a year now - another point that is somewhat ignored by our fans while Hutton is regularly lambasted) and although I do think Carswell can offer more - at the minute Hutton is playing better (or less worse - depending on how  you wish to view it). 

Your comment about him getting game time as an ex-Rangers player works both ways - particularly when Brad Spencer & Stuart Carswell (who were both rotten on Saturday) escape criticism, presumably because they haven't played for Rangers previously. Its a 2 way street. 

We agree that Carswell is the more useful player, so in my opinion he should play (not regardless of form, but in place of an apparently injured Kyle Hutton - yes). I agree Carswell hasn't been at his best, his form led to him being dropped on Saturday, something that never seems to happen with Kyle Hutton.  I reckon I could count on one hand the number of games I've walked away from thinking "Hutton bossed that today". Perhaps Carswell is provided some more leniency because he's shown in larger spells what he's capable of.

You won't hear me defending Spencer, his two goals aside he looks very much like a squad filler to me and I've said as much on this thread. I'd like to see what Carswell and Forbes can do as well, but I doubt we'll ever see that pairing. I don't agree Hutton only gets criticism (or that he gets more criticism) because he's a former Rangers player, we've had plenty of them on our books over the last few seasons and many escape such criticism even when they didn't contribute enough, Tom Walsh for example.

[Howlin' Wilf]

Obviously, John Robertson rates him because he tried to sign him for the Championship.  I'm not sure if he's ever seen him in training.  Hutton played three league games and the cup final v ICT last season and in two of those Carswell played too.

So that's three managers who rate him.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Howlin' Wilf

[untitled00]

2 hours ago, Ross Forbes said:

I genuinely think that's down to pairing him with Hutton (this works both ways to be fair to Hutton, he was often at his best when Carsy wasn't alongside him). It's like playing with two goalkeepers, or two right-backs. They just get in the way of each other, both need a creative player alongside them. Not a clone.

If we ever do move Forbes into central midfield it has to be alongside Carsy though. He needs someone with legs alongside him, and Hutton isn't that man.

What I'm going to say next will get me ridiculed, but what the heck.

I think Kyle Hutton would be better suited to playing football in the Spanish third division than Scottish third tier. Give him a bit of time and space on the ball and he'll do a really good job, make it 100 miles and hour, with folk barreling into tackles and charging about and he gets lost.

Obviously we don't see what goes on in training, but I'll bet that in that environment he's absolutely superb.

I think everyone can agree's that Aitkens decision to sign both players was a waste of money.  The only way both those players can work in the same team is in a 4-2-3-1  and for that to work you need a particularly creative and hardworking midfield 3 and full backs who can oeprate more like wing backs. - we however, do not have this. 

Hutton's game is based more on anticipation and positioning than charging about tackling- so you may be right

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

We agree that Carswell is the more useful player, so in my opinion he should play (not regardless of form, but in place of an apparently injured Kyle Hutton - yes). I agree Carswell hasn't been at his best, his form led to him being dropped on Saturday, something that never seems to happen with Kyle Hutton.  I reckon I could count on one hand the number of games I've walked away from thinking "Hutton bossed that today". Perhaps Carswell is provided some more leniency because he's shown in larger spells what he's capable of.

You won't hear me defending Spencer, his two goals aside he looks very much like a squad filler to me and I've said as much on this thread. I'd like to see what Carswell and Forbes can do as well, but I doubt we'll ever see that pairing. I don't agree Hutton only gets criticism (or that he gets more criticism) because he's a former Rangers player, we've had plenty of them on our books over the last few seasons and many escape such criticism even when they didn't contribute enough, Tom Walsh for example.

What if in injured Kyle Hutton is better than Carswell - as has been the case for a few weeks now? People still get on his back and it's hard not to look at this objectively and think there is a bit of an agenda against the guy tbh.  You yourself said to me on Saturday that you'd take a shite Carswell over a good Hutton - thats not an objective comment. In all honesty it's either something against the guy himself or one of the clubs he previously played for - and given you'd mentioned he's only at this level because he played for Rangers it's not a giant leap to assume that's behind it.

What Carswell did 2 years ago (2016) when he was playing consistently decent should have no bearing on whether he should play in 2018 - it should be dependent on form and Carswell's form has not been great for a few months (and arguably inconsistent at best for last season as well - whether thats due to him playing alongside Hutton or not is neither here nor at this stage - they've done it for long enough now)

Unless Carswell  can return to form ,if we are getting rid of one in January  or end of the season (while again I think Carswell is the more useful player when playing well) then you keep the player who has been better - I don't really understand the difficulty with that....

[The Moonster]

35 minutes ago, untitled00 said:

What if in injured Kyle Hutton is better than Carswell - as has been the case for a few weeks now? People still get on his back and it's hard not to look at this objectively and think there is a bit of an agenda against the guy tbh.  You yourself said to me on Saturday that you'd take a shite Carswell over a good Hutton - thats not an objective comment. In all honesty it's either something against the guy himself or one of the clubs he previously played for - and given you'd mentioned he's only at this level because he played for Rangers it's not a giant leap to assume that's behind it.

What Carswell did 2 years ago (2016) when he was playing consistently decent should have no bearing on whether he should play in 2018 - it should be dependent on form and Carswell's form has not been great for a few months (and arguably inconsistent at best for last season as well - whether thats due to him playing alongside Hutton or not is neither here nor at this stage - they've done it for long enough now)

Unless Carswell  can return to form ,if we are getting rid of one in January  or end of the season (while again I think Carswell is the more useful player when playing well) then you keep the player who has been better - I don't really understand the difficulty with that....

Not saying Carswell has been amazing at any point, but when you have a player lumbering about on the pitch who apparently needs an operation then it seems counter-productive to keep running that player into the ground. I said a shite Carswell is better than a good Hutton, whilst that is undoubtedly an exaggeration and probably wide of the mark (fuelled by pints and frustration), my main point was about Carswell being the better player, which we all agree on.

We'll agree to disagree on this, I don't have an agenda against him, I genuinely just think he's not very good at football. I don't wish the guy any ill will and I would love nothing more than the team to start winning games with Hutton playing well, I don't take any joy in criticising our team. I agree on your last point though I suspect we'll disagree on who the better player has been.

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

At least we can all be united in thinking Willie Dyer and Grant Adam are shite.

[BallochSonsFan]

Hutton isnt a terrible footballer.. There's an argument that both he and Carswell are too similar to play well together as neither offers enough going forward and both want to sit deep and do the unglamorous stuff in front of the back 4. Carswell is better at that job when he's playing well. For most folk that would put him ahead of Hutton. I don't think Carswell has been particularly good for a while now. He has had good games but he hasnt been consistent. He gets an easier ride than Hutton does because he isnt Hutton and because when he's on form he's a better player.

Hutton's attitude is good. Always makes himself available, even when he's carrying an injury, and you never really lack effort from him even if you lack a bit of quality. From that point of view he's probably a good player to have in the squad. What it really highlights is the lack of a proper partner for either of them in central midfield. Arguable that Carswell and Forbes would be our strongest pairing on paper. Forbes has actually played very well at left back and has looked better than Dyer. 

Hutton isnt a great player but he's not the worst we have and hes never been a problem in the dressing room. He'll never be a fan favourite but I don't believe he deserves some of the criticism he gets.

[BallochSonsFan]

48 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Not saying Carswell has been amazing at any point, but when you have a player lumbering about on the pitch who apparently needs an operation then it seems counter-productive to keep running that player into the ground. I said a shite Carswell is better than a good Hutton, whilst that is undoubtedly an exaggeration and probably wide of the mark (fuelled by pints and frustration), my main point was about Carswell being the better player, which we all agree on.

We'll agree to disagree on this, I don't have an agenda against him, I genuinely just think he's not very good at football. I don't wish the guy any ill will and I would love nothing more than the team to start winning games with Hutton playing well, I don't take any joy in criticising our team. I agree on your last point though I suspect we'll disagree on who the better player has been.

I don't know if he is.

A shite Carswell isnt better than a good Hutton. A good Carswell is better than Hutton at his best.

And a shite Hutton is better than what Spencer offered us on Saturday. If the alternative is Spencer's performance on Saturday then give me the dynamic duo of Hutton and Carswell.

Edited November 14, 2018 by BallochSonsFan

[untitled00]

4 minutes ago, BallochSonsFan said:

Hutton isnt a terrible footballer.. There's an argument that both he and Carswell are too similar to play well together as neither offers enough going forward and both want to sit deep and do the unglamorous stuff in front of the back 4. Carswell is better at that job when he's playing well. For most folk that would put him ahead of Hutton. I don't think Carswell has been particularly good for a while now. He has had good games but he hasnt been consistent. He gets an easier ride than Hutton does because he isnt Hutton and because when he's on form he's a better player.

Hutton's attitude is good. Always makes himself available, even when he's carrying an injury, and you never really lack effort from him even if you lack a bit of quality. From that point of view he's probably a good player to have in the squad. What it really highlights is the lack of a proper partner for either of them in central midfield. Arguable that Carswell and Forbes would be our strongest pairing on paper. Forbes has actually played very well at left back and has looked better than Dyer. 

Hutton isnt a great player but he's not the worst we have and hes never been a problem in the dressing room. He'll never be a fan favourite but I don't believe he deserves some of the criticism he gets.

In fairness I'd look better than Dyer at LB. The midfield pairing of Carswell/Forbes would be based upon us obviously signing someone who is actually a competent left back . Our central midfield has been pretty bereft of any genuine creativity since Sam Stanton (and previously Agnew/Turner) and Forbes would at least provide that. He also doesn't have much in the way of pace and eventually a decent opposition manager will have the brainwave of playing someone with pace against him and that becomes an issue as i'm not confident in our central defence being able to cover - of course Duffy himself has admitted it's a stop-gap solution and hopefully a LB is at the top of the agenda come January.

[Boghead ranter]

7 minutes ago, BallochSonsFan said:

I don't know if he is.

55 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Not saying Carswell has been amazing at any point, but when you have a player lumbering about on the pitch who apparently needs an operation then it seems counter-productive to keep running that player into the ground. I said a shite Carswell is better than a good Hutton, whilst that is undoubtedly an exaggeration and probably wide of the mark (fuelled by pints and frustration), my main point was about Carswell being the better player, which we all agree on.

We'll agree to disagree on this, I don't have an agenda against him, I genuinely just think he's not very good at football. I don't wish the guy any ill will and I would love nothing more than the team to start winning games with Hutton playing well, I don't take any joy in criticising our team. I agree on your last point though I suspect we'll disagree on who the better player has been.

 

Bit of selective bolding there, Moonster already said that he was exaggerating and that the statement about a shite Carswell being better than a good Hutton was erroneous (and partially alcohol-related)

[cameron2000]

Hutton is ok until it comes to tracking his man. The amount of times Stenny’s centre mid got in behind Ballantine because Hutton wouldn’t stay with him was ridiculous. The sad thing is that to someone with limited football knowledge it would actually look a bit like Ballantine just had no positional sense and was letting his man go beyond him.

[Sons FC]

1 hour ago, cameron2000 said:

Hutton is ok until it comes to tracking his man. The amount of times Stenny’s centre mid got in behind Ballantine because Hutton wouldn’t stay with him was ridiculous. The sad thing is that to someone with limited football knowledge it would actually look a bit like Ballantine just had no positional sense and was letting his man go beyond him.

This is an outstanding point Cameron. I am a great believer in this. It is very common in football and players are unfairly criticised when team mates let them down.