Jump to content

Double Winning St Johnstone FC Thread


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Radford said:

He shouldn't be the first choice striker but it's a leap to then bin him because of that when he's perfectly adequate to fill a role in the squad. 

You need different types of striker (he leads line well, defends from front and unsettles defenders), you need guys who are happy with a supporting role and you need to make the most of your budget. Kane ticks all three boxes.

Better the devil you know.

I agree with this if the theory is he‘s at Saints to be 3rd or 4th choice but I don’t think he is. He was given the number 9 jersey after Maclean left and has only managed 3 or 4 league goals since. He can hardly complain at a lack of opportunity over the course of the last year either. 

Its definitely right to say he has his uses and in certain matches he’s the perfect option for us to have but is he really good enough to be the outright first choice? 

May hasn’t shown up as well as was hoped - not unexpected given his spell at Aberdeen and the injury and he’s still got a better return than Kane - so we’re back hoping that we sign a striker in a transfer window again. If push comes to shove and we have to sacrifice a forward in order to get another one in, Kane is the logical choice to pick. It’s a shame but the brutal reality is he can’t really argue if that’s the outcome. No way he has ever reached his goal scoring target for Saints in a season and if we have the chance of signing a player who does a similar job but who might contribute more goals, I think the club won’t have much choice but to take it. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Makes the month of craziness on this thread over him signing that much funnier.

From my own point of view, I wanted us to sign May because it was clear it was our manager’s number one choice in his number one priority position. Some of the other players we were linked with probablY demonstrated it wasn’t a particularly big list below May either. 
 

The farce that ensued was embarrassing frankly but I think most Saints supporters had doubts about him on the basis of what he’s done since leaving us in 2014. We aren’t playing to his strengths right now but even still, the odd flash of class isn’t enough to justify what is a huge outlay for Saints. 

Edited by Kyle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to burst RG's wet dream but we only watch cove due to young John Robertson playing there.
I believe the forwards we are looking at are from down south....
Its at the stage now where I enjoy the feeling of rage your rumour teasing brings about. Name them via PM pls 
Any idea if they're planning to sign them this window, or if its a PCA?
Also, a total random ICT fan has claimed they're trying to sign Chris Kane. No substance behind it but it feels like a shite rumour to make up.
I see Random has been totally ignored. I am for one shocked.

However I do like Perthsaint1977, puts out some information and let everyone talk about it and then buggers off and then back with some more information.

A good effort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Costanza said:

Signing Liam Boyce will cheer everyone up

Indeed. 

Seems to be the consensus that we need a CB, a RB and a striker. Not sure I entirely agree. 

A couple of months ago we were screaming out for a CB to replace the hapless Duffy, a RB we signed with little intention of playing much this year, even in his preferred postion, and Ralston who is by common consent just about the weakest player we have. Tanser wasn't performing defensively either.

Fast forward to the current squad and we have a pair of CB's that have hardly put a foot wrong since Gordon returned. Also LB has been stiffened up considerably by Callum Booth. And (appreciate this is controversial) I've always thought that Ralston is not as terrible as others think. He's error prone but his crossing and distribution is sound and I think the more he plays the better he gets. We now have a back row that's dropped 1 goal in 5 games (caveat- we've only played bottom 6 clubs). My preference here is for a cover utility CB that can play RB until the end of the season if any of Ralston/Gordon/Kerr are out. This should free up wages for a striker, which to me is as big a priority. Losing goals was costing us games, now it's not scoring.

I'm with the view that whilst Kane has a lot of good attributes he's simply not good enough for the level. His touch and finishing are rotten to watch and that's backed up by stats. Fine as a 3rd choice but for that we need 2 better choices. Hendy is work in progress and an impact sub, and he could well be a lot more in time so we want to keep him developing, but he can't be first choice starter for the next 4 months as they're just too important to this club. I'm OK with May startin if we play 2 up front but we need also need a proper lone striker for us to have that option. If we attack the channels with 1 up front we need a striker that can get on the end of crosses, and if we link through the middle we need an intuitive penalty box finisher as well as a hold up man/number 10 (which May could well be). 

So for what it's worth I'd be happy to ship out Swanson, Callachan, McMillan, Kane, Estonian, Anderson and (reluctantly) Craig if it meant that we could get a decent experienced journeyman CB/RB and a quality striker. Highly unlikely we'll be able to move any more than 2 of that lot on though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Radford said:

He shouldn't be the first choice striker but it's a leap to then bin him because of that when he's perfectly adequate to fill a role in the squad. 

You need different types of striker (he leads line well, defends from front and unsettles defenders), you need guys who are happy with a supporting role and you need to make the most of your budget. Kane ticks all three boxes.

Better the devil you know.

The issue is we dont have space for a 3rd back up striker. That's why Kane needs to go.

May isnt going anywhere. Hendry is more effective. We only have space for a starting striker now.

Kane was given his chance to fill that role and has failed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the most frustrating thing about Kane isn't his goal record or the fact he provides basically zero goal threat. 

It's after a relatively good performance like against Ross County without fail he doesn't follow it up with a string of good performances. In fact the opposite generally imo. 1 good performance followed by 6-7 nothing performances. Never kicks on, never able to turn a goal or good performance into a bit if extra confidence. 

Countless examples of it as well. 

Then you go on twitter and you see his Mrs gushing about the fact she cannot believe she seen him on TV... Less said about his replies the better as well. Cringe. 

Edited by Mr Positive, sometimes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ali_91 said:

I don’t know if that’s true, running with four strikers, when Hendry and Kane you’d imagine are on lower wages, doesn’t appear to be farcical squad management, especially by Tommy’s standards. 

Mays reported wage would make it hard to justify another striker on first team wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Radford said:

I will love it when Chris Kane gets his, well deserved, new contract. 

Swiftly followed by Tommy loaning out Hendry to the Championship.

I can only imagine the reaction....

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

It's after a relatively good performance like against Ross County without fail he doesn't follow it up with a string of good performances. In fact the opposite generally imo. 1 good performance followed by 6-7 nothing performances. Never kicks on, never able to turn a goal or good performance into a bit if extra confidence.

This is a fair criticism.  He rarely builds on his good performances, which is why he's never kicked on and established himself as a starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cant complain, did it not come out our home attendance against Rangers this season was 35% lower than the average? The only home crowd below 2000. 

Folk just dont like attending games against them, not helped by them intimidating kids outside the ground for years before they died.

I wont be there when theyve got the 3 stands, not an atmosphere I can be arsed being in, but understand why the club is going this route. An extra 3k fans, potentially four times a season, is a lot of money to club at our level.

Edited by RandomGuy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dele said:

Yikes. Turning your home games against the Old Firm into away games. 

200.gif

Its embarrassing but what can we do? Home fans dont turn up and they club cant maintain this level if they dont.

Same folk you never see at games on Twitter absolutely slating it and saying theyll never be back, not understanding they're the problem here rather than the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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