The Greenock Morton Thread - It's Better Than Yours

[The Ghost of B A R P]

I for one am deep into the 'bargaining stage' with Roy: he can kick the ball with both feet, he's relatively quick, he's no doubt coming cheap... and the hard-headed wee genius that is Sir Doug will mainly play him wide (meaning there's a central striker still to come).

Might not last much past Saturday, but I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts.

[TheGoon]

[Replays]

Darren Hynes signs for Clyde. Given how awful we currently are (particularly at full back) if he in any way resembles a footballer, he should be an improvement. What sort of player can we expect?

[port-ton]

Hard to tell how he will do for you in my opinion.

He wasn't good enough for the Championship but having watched him I'm still not sure what his level actually is.

I wouldn't say he ever really let us down when he played but he was always the noticeable weak link. 

If he goes in and gives solid 7/10 performances every week for you then I wouldn't be surprised but equally if he's pretty useless and not good enough for league one then I wouldn't be that surprised either. 

 

[vikingTON]

26 minutes ago, Scott-Replay said:

 if he in any way resembles a footballer, 

[Dunning1874]

On 10/01/2023 at 17:40, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Nobody's saying he hasn't done well or that he isn't much better through the middle than down the right... but undroppable? Starting every game, regardless? That's ridiculous.

We should be looking to sign someone who's going to at the very least challenge Muirhead for a starting slot through the middle. Very disappointing if Roy turns out to be all we get in that position

Obviously we'd want someone who can compete for his place in the team and no one should be undroppable, but we're not realistically going to sign someone specifically to be first choice ahead of him when he's scoring as many as he is.

That means more exciting signings are probably off the table when you can't give assurances on game time: Hearts aren't likely to give us Euan Henderson to sit on the bench and have to compete for a place when he could go to Raith or Arbroath and be pretty much guaranteed a start. Even if we could compete on wages for someone like Oli Shaw (which we can't) he wouldn't come without a guarantee of being first choice.

I'm not saying I'm impressed by Roy on paper and I'd have hoped for someone with a far better pedigree, but you have to acknowledge it's a difficult situation to recruit in.

[vikingTON]

4 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

Obviously we'd want someone who can compete for his place in the team and no one should be undroppable, but we're not realistically going to sign someone specifically to be first choice ahead of him when he's scoring as many as he is.

That means more exciting signings are probably off the table when you can't give assurances on game time: Hearts aren't likely to give us Euan Henderson to sit on the bench and have to compete for a place when he could go to Raith or Arbroath and be pretty much guaranteed a start. Even if we could compete on wages for someone like Oli Shaw (which we can't) he wouldn't come without a guarantee of being first choice.

I'm not saying I'm impressed by Roy on paper and I'd have hoped for someone with a far better pedigree, but you have to acknowledge it's a difficult situation to recruit in.

That might be accurate for loan signings, but any forward with the desired ability and mindset to succeed should not require a nonsense 'guarantee' of first team football before signing a permanent contract. They should have every confidence of displacing Muirhead based on application and quality - starting from the bench and making a clear case to start. 

Indeed that is what Muirhead himself had to do this time twelve months ago - although Imrie's response of changing the shape of the team to accommodate him in the starting line-up was a rare misstep. 

[The Ghost of B A R P]

On 14/01/2023 at 09:34, Dunning1874 said:

Obviously we'd want someone who can compete for his place in the team and no one should be undroppable, but we're not realistically going to sign someone specifically to be first choice ahead of him when he's scoring as many as he is.

That means more exciting signings are probably off the table when you can't give assurances on game time: Hearts aren't likely to give us Euan Henderson to sit on the bench and have to compete for a place when he could go to Raith or Arbroath and be pretty much guaranteed a start. Even if we could compete on wages for someone like Oli Shaw (which we can't) he wouldn't come without a guarantee of being first choice.

I'm not saying I'm impressed by Roy on paper and I'd have hoped for someone with a far better pedigree, but you have to acknowledge it's a difficult situation to recruit in.

Recruitment is difficult because recruitment is difficult... I really don't think how Muirhead is playing affects that at all: that is, whether he's going through a good spell or, more recently, reverting to the norm, he still isn't good enough to be the main striker who plays most weeks. It's clear we need something better in that position to challenge.

Said before the season started that Muirhead and Blues are good enough to be part of our squad, but not good enough to be first picks on a consistent basis. Nothing has happened since to change my mind.

[The Ghost of B A R P]

There are some pretty obvious reasons why we've hit a poor spell (a long run of away games, plus shitty penalties in tight games), but we need to acknowledge also that Imrie has made a couple of bad selection calls over the past couple of games; unlike him, but true nonetheless.

Against Partick, it was imo an error to start Miller in front of McGrattan; the new signing should have come off the bench. Yesterday, I'm with him in giving Quitongo a break before his body blows up... but playing Miller down the right is a strange one. Imrie appears to have a mild obsession with playing wide players on the 'wrong' side, so that they come in onto their stronger foot. That needs to go in the bin.

If Miller can show he's a better shout than McGrattan down the left, fair enough; but Roy should be the option to give Quitongo a break down the right...

... and, as above, Muirhead should be juking it out with a new signing for the central striker role (and certainly not starting every game).

That would give us some pretty decent options across the front three, both in terms of covering injuries/ suspensions and substitutions during games; absolutely no need to start pulling people all over the shop and disturbing a set-up that was working very well.

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

There are some pretty obvious reasons why we've hit a poor spell (a long run of away games, plus shitty penalties in tight games), but we need to acknowledge also that Imrie has made a couple of bad selection calls over the past couple of games; unlike him, but true nonetheless.

Against Partick, it was imo an error to start Miller in front of McGrattan; the new signing should have come off the bench. 

On what basis? Imrie has been quite clear in warning McGrattan and Kabia that they haven't been contributing enough. That was the manager's assessment, on public record, about six weeks' ago. So why should he retain a player that he doesn't think is contributing enough, over a new signing who is expected to bring that quality?

I think McGrattan could consider himself harshly done by, but that's just professional football. With every passing week's absence he seems to be getting better and better in people's estimations though, as if we weren't didn't have any very ropey spells in our previous games too. 

[Dunning1874]

3 hours ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Roy should be the option to give Quitongo a break down the right...

While it's possible looking at his track record Roy isn't going to be good enough full stop, yesterday's display is more than enough evidence that he shouldn't play on the wing. If he's anything he's a centre forward.

[The Ghost of B A R P]

3 hours ago, virginton said:

On what basis? Imrie has been quite clear in warning McGrattan and Kabia that they haven't been contributing enough. That was the manager's assessment, on public record, about six weeks' ago. So why should he retain a player that he doesn't think is contributing enough, over a new signing who is expected to bring that quality?

I think McGrattan could consider himself harshly done by, but that's just professional football. With every passing week's absence he seems to be getting better and better in people's estimations though, as if we weren't didn't have any very ropey spells in our previous games too. 

So you agree? McGrattan was giving the 4-3-3 a bit of balance and we were getting results?

And I don’t think there’s much retrospect going on here: most people were surprised at the time when McGrattan was dropped at Firhill.

As I said, I think it’s possible/probable that Miller establishes himself as first choice on the left… but I think it was poor management to put him straight into the team rather than bring him on after an hour (and worse still to start him on the right yesterday).

Bottom line is that we’ve gone from winning pretty consistently to losing and playing pretty poorly. Team selection might not be the biggest factor in that, as I’ve acknowledged… but it is a factor.

1 hour ago, Dunning1874 said:

While it's possible looking at his track record Roy isn't going to be good enough full stop, yesterday's display is more than enough evidence that he shouldn't play on the wing. If he's anything he's a centre forward.

He should ideally be cover for Quitongo down the right (or a general purpose, anywhere across the front three option). If we’ve signed him specifically as a centre forward, that means Muirhead is going to play more often than not… and yesterday’s display, along with many others, is more than enough evidence that he basically isn’t reliable enough to be a regular starter in that position.

 

[Dunning1874]

7 hours ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

He should ideally be cover for Quitongo down the right

There would be nothing ideal about this, for the same reason it wouldn't be ideal to use Pignatiello at centre forward or Green at full back: Roy isn't a winger.

I agree about McGrattan. This isn't a case of a player magically getting better in the imagination of the support through a spell out injured in the manner of Stephen Stirling, this is a case of a player in good form being dropped and that decision being met with surprise, then his replacement in the team putting in poorer performances than him.

[vikingTON]

10 hours ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

So you agree? McGrattan was giving the 4-3-3 a bit of balance and we were getting results?

I don't recall too much stunning balance in the team at Arbroath or Raith, no. 

More importantly than my view is the fact that Imrie had already called out both Kabia and McGrattan for not contributing enough to what he wants his wide players to deliver. And so the manager responded once the transfer window opened by bringing in other options that might do that job better - and in Miller's case has a much higher chance of reaching that level this season. 

Quote

And I don’t think there’s much retrospect going on here: most people were surprised at the time when McGrattan was dropped at Firhill.

People really weren't surprised, but rather used it to gurn afterwards. Just like they did about Grimshaw being brought into the team in September - nobody's complaining about that now. 

Quote

As I said, I think it’s possible/probable that Miller establishes himself as first choice on the left… but I think it was poor management to put him straight into the team rather than bring him on after an hour (and worse still to start him on the right yesterday).

Why is bringing a player on after an hour better management? What evidence is there to support this claim (rather than mewling about player injustice)?

In the absence of that, I'm pretty happy to go with Sir Douglas' decision over the McGrattan fan club. He's done fine integrating into the first team, but the idea that we do not lose any away games in our endless parade of away games with him in the team is nonsense.

Quote

Bottom line is that we’ve gone from winning pretty consistently to losing and playing pretty poorly. Team selection might not be the biggest factor in that, as I’ve acknowledged… but it is a factor.

We didn't win a game in December either, so your it must be the team selection argument is also bollocks.

[The Ghost of B A R P]

3 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

There would be nothing ideal about this, for the same reason it wouldn't be ideal to use Pignatiello at centre forward or Green at full back: Roy isn't a winger.

I'll assume you're having a wee joke by comparing RB to CF or GK to FB to... shifting a forward across the front three in a 4-3-3? Most managers who play 4-3-3 want at least a couple of players who can play anywhere across the front three (nobody said 'winger').

The serious point is that if Imrie _doesn't_ see Roy as that 'anywhere across the front three' type of player, we almost certainly aren't getting anybody else in as a main striker. And that would be very bad.

 

3 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

 

I agree about McGrattan. This isn't a case of a player magically getting better in the imagination of the support through a spell out injured in the manner of Stephen Stirling, this is a case of a player in good form being dropped and that decision being met with surprise, then his replacement in the team putting in poorer performances than him.

Agree. Think it's pretty clear that he helped balance the team and was playing reasonably well; not saying he should be a permanent fixture, but howking him straight out was a poor call imo.

But see below...

Edited January 16, 2023 by The Ghost of B A R P

[The Ghost of B A R P]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

I don't recall too much stunning balance in the team at Arbroath or Raith, no. 

We drew both those games (away from home).

2 hours ago, virginton said:

People really weren't surprised, but rather used it to gurn afterwards. Just like they did about Grimshaw being brought into the team in September - nobody's complaining about that now. 

Grimshaw came from the Premier League, Miller from tier 5 in England. There was no doubt (in my mind, at least) that Grimshaw was a significant upgrade (and at RB, as I argued from the beginning).

Miller _might_ be a better option down the left, but it isn't as clear... and then shifting him out to the right to accommodate Roy on the left is just, for me, over-thinking it and getting caught up in this 'wide-players coming inside onto their stronger foot' stuff. Quitongo's almost certainly going to play wide right for us; Miller should be nowhere near that position.

2 hours ago, virginton said:

Why is bringing a player on after an hour better management? What evidence is there to support this claim (rather than mewling about player injustice)?

Pretty straightforward. Gives the guy in possession and who has been doing a more than passable job an opportunity to show he can respond positively knowing a signing has been made in the position he currently occupies. That's standard 'good management'; 'injustice' has nothing to do with it.

2 hours ago, virginton said:

In the absence of that, I'm pretty happy to go with Sir Douglas' decision over the McGrattan fan club. He's done fine integrating into the first team, but the idea that we do not lose any away games in our endless parade of away games with him in the team is nonsense.

We didn't win a game in December either, so your it must be the team selection argument is also bollocks.

We only played two league games in December. And we lost neither of them.

Whereas we've now had two straight defeats, one of them against the weakest team in the league, who hadn't won in 9.

Pretty conclusive.

If you bother to check back you'll see my argument is that we've hit the wobble for THREE reasons. In order: 1. a run of away games; 2. shitty penalties; 3. questionable team selection (and not just in relation to McGrattan, who, as far as I know, doesn't have a fan club).

Again, seems pretty conclusive to me.

You can argue the balance of those factors, but ignoring the third altogether is bordering on, dare I say it, happy clapping.

[vikingTON]

Your argument was that we were 'winning games' until the transfer window and McGrattan being cruelly robbed of his place. We didn't win any game in December. It's really not my fault that you're wrong.

And Imrie quite evidently disagrees with your assessment of a passable job which is why publicly called out both Kabia and McGrattan weeks ago. Nothing changed between that point and the transfer window opening, so neither player justified a starting spot in the consistent view of the manager. 

Edited January 16, 2023 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Your argument was that we were 'winning games' until the transfer window and McGrattan being cruelly robbed of his place. We didn't win any game in December. It's really not my fault that you're wrong.

And Imrie quite evidently disagrees with your assessment of a passable job which is why publicly called out both Kabia and McGrattan weeks ago. Nothing changed between that point and the transfer window opening, so neither player justified a starting spot in the consistent view of the manager. 

Why don't you give up stating (inaccurately) what other people's arguments are and actually address what they're saying?

Did you miss the (counts them) _six_ league games we won in October and November?

What's changed since then? To re-cap: long run of away fixtures; dodgy refereeing decisions in tight games; questionable selections in the last two.

It's really not my fault it's really not difficult not to get that wrong.

[vikingTON]

13 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Why don't you give up stating (inaccurately) what other people's arguments are and actually address what they're saying?

Did you miss the (counts them) _six_ league games we won in October and November?What's changed since then?

To re-cap: long run of away fixtures; dodgy refereeing decisions in tight games; questionable selections in the last two.

The questionable selections claim is your opinion rather than supported by evidence - not least given that the team winning games, err, stopped winning games a full month before the transfer window opened.

The cause is quite clearly the first two points rather than your dreamboat midfielder being dropped to the bench then.

And it's just as well that our current manager is not Gus McPherson and so does not buy 'games won in October' as a valid reason to stay in a team three months later as you do. 

Quote

It's really not my fault it's really not difficult not to get that wrong.

^^^ word salad 

Edited January 16, 2023 by vikingTON

[The Ghost of B A R P]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

The questionable selections claim is your opinion rather than supported by evidence - not least given that the team winning games, err, stopped winning games a full month before the transfer window opened.

The cause is quite clearly the first two points rather than your dreamboat midfielder being dropped to the bench then.

And it's just as well that our current manager is not Gus McPherson and so does not buy 'games won in October' as a valid reason to stay in a team three months later as you do. 

^^^ word salad 

And when did the _losing_ games start?

That's right, when Imrie started tinkering with the line-up.

Causation or correlation? Who the f**k knows... but let's not pretend that because Imrie has been fantastic for us he can't get anything wrong...

Exhibit #1: playing Calvin Miller on the right, only marginally more bizarre than playing Robbie Muirhead on the right, which was happening until Quitongo got suspended and he shuffled the pack into something much more effective.

[I'll have a wee think about what Gus MacPherson has got to do with any of this, btw; struggling to remember him winning six games in total, never mind in a couple of months...]