The Official Airdrieonians Thread - 2019/20 and beyond

[cb_diamond]

26 minutes ago, Shandön Par said:

Lewis Martin a possibility for you lot? Very decent servant for Pars and can play a number of positions. Old team mate of McCabe too.

Did he have a number of injury problems in recent years or am I thinking of someone else? 

[Shandon Par]

3 minutes ago, cb_diamond said:

Did he have a number of injury problems in recent years or am I thinking of someone else? 

Yeah, that’s him. A crock then a bit of mystery illness but fit again now. Classy player at centre back, left back and pretty much anywhere else. A few folk surprised to see him leave but the new manager needs to have as clean a slate as possible. 

[cb_diamond]

22 minutes ago, Shandön Par said:

Yeah, that’s him. A crock then a bit of mystery illness but fit again now. Classy player at centre back, left back and pretty much anywhere else. A few folk surprised to see him leave but the new manager needs to have as clean a slate as possible. 

If McCabe is planning to continue stylistically in the vein of Murray as has been mentioned and reinforced by the retention of key players from last season then he sounds a useful addition especially given his ability to play CB and LB and our lack of current options in the second of those two positions.

[David Fernández]

Noticed that Jaze Kabia has the same agent (Jackie McNamara) as McCabe and Frizzell. Wonder if there is a chance he could sign on loan from Livi. Probably the only Falkirk player I thought who looked half decent last season.

[airdrieman]

23 hours ago, Mr November said:

I saw Dunfermline released Lewis Martin, who both McCabe and Fordyce played with there. I think he's more of a centre back who can also play left back, so maybe not as adventurous as Paterson, but he's someone who was quite highly rated a few years ago but seems to have struggled with injuries since and perhaps a fresh start is needed. He seems like the kind of player who might end up joining us. 

 

2 hours ago, Shandön Par said:

Lewis Martin a possibility for you lot? Very decent servant for Pars and can play a number of positions. Old team mate of McCabe too.

If he used to play for Dunfermline AND he's an injury prone centre-half then he'll almost definitely sign for us. Looking forward to our usual batch of Celtic loanees and ex Leeds United youth haddy too. 

[Aufc]

Maybe a West Ham striker?

[cb_diamond]

I don't know I'm expecting half the Chinese Super League to sign once Gowser turns us into a national club like Man City or PSG

[cb_diamond]

2 minutes ago, airdrieman said:

 

If he used to play for Dunfermline AND he's an injury prone centre-half then he'll almost definitely sign for us. Looking forward to our usual batch of Celtic loanees and ex Leeds United youth haddy too. 

You misspelled "Dumbarton"

[airdrieman]

5 minutes ago, cb_diamond said:

You misspelled "Dumbarton"

Kill two birds with one stone and get Eoghan Stokes back.

[cb_diamond]

55 minutes ago, airdrieman said:

Kill two birds with one stone and get Eoghan Stokes back.

That's Eoghan Stokes the greatest footballer in all of creation being held back by managers who don't get him and other players who keep keep up with his elite mentality? The one that gets punted after a season from everywhere he goes Eoghan Stokes?

That interview still cracks me up.

[CHEMOMAN]

Gotta love the whole pre-season manoeuvres. Every c*unt has an agent, every agent has a stable, it's pure soap opera!

 

[Raith Against The Machine]

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered (and please point me to the right place if it has) but what is Ian Murray's preferred formation/set-up? Is he quite militant with how he adheres to it or does he adapt fairly frequently for different games? And do you think he found players to fit into the way he wanted to play, or did the system come about as the best way to get results from the players he had at his disposal? 

[cb_diamond]

21 minutes ago, Against The Machine said:

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered (and please point me to the right place if it has) but what is Ian Murray's preferred formation/set-up? Is he quite militant with how he adheres to it or does he adapt fairly frequently for different games? And do you think he found players to fit into the way he wanted to play, or did the system come about as the best way to get results from the players he had at his disposal? 

You may get several different answers here and I suspect others won't agree with me, but I believe at his core Murray wanted to play the good attacking football we played this past season. Believe it or not that was the first season where he had complete control over personnel, signings, etc and it proved to be wonderful to watch at times. In terms of tactics he will want his players as fit as possible and willing to keep pushing to the end, particularly his full backs and wingers. He can also be very astute with subs, as was seen in the Montrose play off game where he was willing to make subs to change the game after 25 mins or so. However, at times he can revert back to "Murray ball" where he fixates on not losing a goal. That can be rough to watch. If you get the Murray of this season though and the same Dylan Easton you've won a watch.

 

[dextermorgan]

We will probably never know to what extent Murray was unable to influence the signing of players during his tenure. It would appear however that he had full control in the last season which was a joy to watch. This was in complete contrast to the previous seasons where I was convinced that he simply set his sides out to 'not lose'. The football was dreadful at times, despite having some exciting players. One thing you will notice is that his players will have to be fit or they will disappear very quickly. He has little patience for those guys who are not committed to the cause as many found out to their cost. He expects every player to defend when they don't have the ball so he has little time for forwards who don't track back, no matter how many goals they score. He should do very well at Raith, providing he has the full backing of the board and a bit of patience from the fans.

[Mr November]

1 hour ago, Against The Machine said:

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered (and please point me to the right place if it has) but what is Ian Murray's preferred formation/set-up? Is he quite militant with how he adheres to it or does he adapt fairly frequently for different games? And do you think he found players to fit into the way he wanted to play, or did the system come about as the best way to get results from the players he had at his disposal? 

As others have said, he covered quite a lot of formations/tactics in his time with us. The biggest thing with Murray is that he’s happy to play guys he trusts (Carrick, McKay, the McGill’s, O’Reilly etc) in different or unfamiliar positions if things aren’t working, rather than blindly sticking to the same system and picking players he’s clearly not convinced by. He’s very much focused on hard work and anyone who doesn’t track back enough or work for the team is out the door pretty quickly. Last season we played some brilliant football but the team worked incredibly hard on and off the ball, which was key to us starting so many games at a very high intensity and ultimately winning so many games. Outwith those core principles, he seems quite flexible depending on the players available though.

In his first season we mostly played a very defensive 5-4-1/5-3-2 as he didn’t seem to trust the players at all and we lacked wide players anyway.

His second season started with him switching between 4-3-3 (weirdly with Gallagher on the wing and Smith through the middle) and five at the back systems but we never looked comfortable with either. He stumbled upon a compact counter-attacking 4-2-3-1 in a game up at Forfar when Big Nat went off injured at 1-0 with Kurtis Roberts coming on. That sub changed the game and we won 4-1 and went on to the win the following five games but it never really went anywhere after that. 

The third season started with four at the back until Turner and Paton came in and we switched to a counter-attacking 3-5-2, with Paton holding and Turner and Carrick pushing forward. At times Turner played that deeper role and pretty much just ran the midfield on his own. 

Last season Murray ostensibly entirely built the squad (we had no wingers at all) to play a more possession based 3-5-2, building on the success from the previous season, but we had mixed results in the cup and he abandoned it completely after a shambles on the opening day against Montrose. After that it was 4-3-3 for a while, then a very attacking, possession based narrow diamond to fit in Agnew/McCabe, Frizzell, McInroy and Easton before going back to 4-3-3 but playing a similar style when he realised the diamond didn’t work without McInroy. 

If you get off to a poor start and Murray doesn’t trust the players enough then you could be in for some vintage Murrayball, but I suspect he’ll be going for an attacking, possession based style of play again. Looking at Raith’s squad, most of the midfielders would fit that very well. I think he’ll try and recruit this summer to play a 4-3-3 or diamond like that but he’s certainly open to changing it if things don’t work. It’s also worth mentioning that if you’re losing he will literally just keep chucking strikers on until he runs out of them, and then he starts sending big defenders up too. It doesn’t always work but it’s a good laugh and when it does (Montrose in the play-offs is a great example), it’s very exciting to watch.

[RRFC_Liam]

43 minutes ago, dextermorgan said:

He should do very well at Raith, providing he has the full backing of the board and a bit of patience from the fans.

He will be backed by the board I would imagine or he wouldn’t have taken the job and I think fans will give him patience as we understand it won’t be an instant

in terms of control of transfers he will be in total control of who he wants to bring in as we don’t have a DOF so I think he will be good for us hopefully 

[RRFC_Liam]

12 minutes ago, Mr November said:

As others have said, he covered quite a lot of formations/tactics in his time with us. The biggest thing with Murray is that he’s happy to play guys he trusts (Carrick, McKay, the McGill’s, O’Reilly etc) in different or unfamiliar positions if things aren’t working, rather than blindly sticking to the same system and picking players he’s clearly not convinced by. He’s very much focused on hard work and anyone who doesn’t track back enough or work for the team is out the door pretty quickly. Last season we played some brilliant football but the team worked incredibly hard on and off the ball, which was key to us starting so many games at a very high intensity and ultimately winning so many games. Outwith those core principles, he seems quite flexible depending on the players available though.

In his first season we mostly played a very defensive 5-4-1/5-3-2 as he didn’t seem to trust the players at all and we lacked wide players anyway.

His second season started with him switching between 4-3-3 (weirdly with Gallagher on the wing and Smith through the middle) and five at the back systems but we never looked comfortable with either. He stumbled upon a compact counter-attacking 4-2-3-1 in a game up at Forfar when Big Nat went off injured at 1-0 with Kurtis Roberts coming on. That sub changed the game and we won 4-1 and went on to the win the following five games but it never really went anywhere after that. 

The third season started with four at the back until Turner and Paton came in and we switched to a counter-attacking 3-5-2, with Paton holding and Turner and Carrick pushing forward. At times Turner played that deeper role and pretty much just ran the midfield on his own. 

Last season Murray ostensibly entirely built the squad (we had no wingers at all) to play a more possession based 3-5-2, building on the success from the previous season, but we had mixed results in the cup and he abandoned it completely after a shambles on the opening day against Montrose. After that it was 4-3-3 for a while, then a very attacking, possession based narrow diamond to fit in Agnew/McCabe, Frizzell, McInroy and Easton before going back to 4-3-3 but playing a similar style when he realised the diamond didn’t work without McInroy. 

If you get off to a poor start and Murray doesn’t trust the players enough then you could be in for some vintage Murrayball, but I suspect he’ll be going for an attacking, possession based style of play again. Looking at Raith’s squad, most of the midfielders would fit that very well. I think he’ll try and recruit this summer to play a 4-3-3 or diamond like that but he’s certainly open to changing it if things don’t work. It’s also worth mentioning that if you’re losing he will literally just keep chucking strikers on until he runs out of them, and then he starts sending big defenders up too. It doesn’t always work but it’s a good laugh and when it does (Montrose in the play-offs is a great example), it’s very exciting to watch.

Under McGlynn we mostly played 4231 and he wouldn’t change his ways until he had too and kept loyal to players who hasn’t performed well enough’ so I’m glad too see Murray is good in that aspect that he will change and not be loyal if it goes wrong.

our entire system last year relied on Brad Spencer in midfield picking it up from deep and starting attacks and no coincidence we started to dip when he got injured up at Gayfield and McGlynn tried to shoehorn Stanton in the role and simply couldn’t do it and we got overran at times.

so I’m hoping Murray doesn’t rely on 1 player for the system he wants to play because we have all the ingredients there to play attacking/passing football  

 

 

Edited May 29, 2022 by RRFC_Liam

[Rhys McCabe Hype Train]

7 hours ago, Against The Machine said:

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered (and please point me to the right place if it has) but what is Ian Murray's preferred formation/set-up? Is he quite militant with how he adheres to it or does he adapt fairly frequently for different games? And do you think he found players to fit into the way he wanted to play, or did the system come about as the best way to get results from the players he had at his disposal? 

If nothing else I found Murray to be quite naïve tactically. The games we won from nowhere (Dumbarton madness, Montrose play off) were won more because he chucked as many attacking players as possible on the pitch and abandoned any semblance of a system. Good entertainment and that, but does lead to daftness such as against Clyde at Broadwood where you’ve got 5 strikers, 3 midfielders and 2 defenders on the pitch having made all your subs, then powerless to stop the opposition grabbing a last kick of the ball equaliser.

That said, with a ~45% win rate and the only Airdrie manager in recent memory not to be emptied because of bad results.

Recruitment wise, this is the first season he didn’t have his hands tied with agents or a director of football making decisions for him. He built the best team we’ve seen in a good 15 years and seemed to be negotiating to keep them right up until he walked out the door. He seems loyal. He stuck with Agnew at holding midfield which would’ve been my only criticism through the playoffs - in all four matches the game seemed to pass him by.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Rhys McCabe Hype Train

[Raith Against The Machine]

That's really interesting, thanks everyone for the responses. 

Tactically he sounds like a bit of an open book, lots of different defensive and midfield permutations. I'm really intrigued to see how he sets out his midfield at the Rovers, particularly at the beginning of the season. He'll almost certainly be constrained to a back four just through availability of centre halfs, and based on what's been said I think he'll probably favour a diamond (no pun intended), even though that'll mean leaving our two "showiest" players on the bench in Dario Zanatta and Aidan Connolly. If we sign Scott Brown, as has been mooted, I think we could stamp a confirmation on that idea. 

And as for throwing strikers forward, he'll have a job to do there because we've only got two, but I imagine that's the item at the top of his agenda. 

At this level, I don't think it's a huge issue if the manager is a wee bit too rigid or not particularly reactive. If you've got the right players in from the start you'll still win more than you lose, as Airdrie saw last season, and that in-game stubbornness is a price I'm more than willing to pay for the most important thing that Murray brings to the table, and it's what you've highlighted above. 

My biggest fear when we lost John McGlynn was that he was (without doing a disservice to Paul Smith or the others in his backroom) a bit of a one man football department. Compared to other Championship clubs we've got a very lean structure and McGlynn made it work by putting in all the hours and being very hands on with his training, and his scouting, and his recruitment etc. I was worried that if we brought in a Kevin Thomson, for example, that he wouldn't thrive in that position, but it sounds like Ian Murray has fought to get to exactly that point with Airdrie, where he's got the autonomy to run the show himself. 

Time will tell if he's successful, and like most managers I think he'll ultimately live and die by his recruitment, but at least the whole setup looks like quite a natural fit. 

[Tory Boy]

7 hours ago, Mr November said:

As others have said, he covered quite a lot of formations/tactics in his time with us. The biggest thing with Murray is that he’s happy to play guys he trusts (Carrick, McKay, the McGill’s, O’Reilly etc) in different or unfamiliar positions if things aren’t working, rather than blindly sticking to the same system and picking players he’s clearly not convinced by. He’s very much focused on hard work and anyone who doesn’t track back enough or work for the team is out the door pretty quickly. Last season we played some brilliant football but the team worked incredibly hard on and off the ball, which was key to us starting so many games at a very high intensity and ultimately winning so many games. Outwith those core principles, he seems quite flexible depending on the players available though.

In his first season we mostly played a very defensive 5-4-1/5-3-2 as he didn’t seem to trust the players at all and we lacked wide players anyway.

His second season started with him switching between 4-3-3 (weirdly with Gallagher on the wing and Smith through the middle) and five at the back systems but we never looked comfortable with either. He stumbled upon a compact counter-attacking 4-2-3-1 in a game up at Forfar when Big Nat went off injured at 1-0 with Kurtis Roberts coming on. That sub changed the game and we won 4-1 and went on to the win the following five games but it never really went anywhere after that. 

The third season started with four at the back until Turner and Paton came in and we switched to a counter-attacking 3-5-2, with Paton holding and Turner and Carrick pushing forward. At times Turner played that deeper role and pretty much just ran the midfield on his own. 

Last season Murray ostensibly entirely built the squad (we had no wingers at all) to play a more possession based 3-5-2, building on the success from the previous season, but we had mixed results in the cup and he abandoned it completely after a shambles on the opening day against Montrose. After that it was 4-3-3 for a while, then a very attacking, possession based narrow diamond to fit in Agnew/McCabe, Frizzell, McInroy and Easton before going back to 4-3-3 but playing a similar style when he realised the diamond didn’t work without McInroy. 

If you get off to a poor start and Murray doesn’t trust the players enough then you could be in for some vintage Murrayball, but I suspect he’ll be going for an attacking, possession based style of play again. Looking at Raith’s squad, most of the midfielders would fit that very well. I think he’ll try and recruit this summer to play a 4-3-3 or diamond like that but he’s certainly open to changing it if things don’t work. It’s also worth mentioning that if you’re losing he will literally just keep chucking strikers on until he runs out of them, and then he starts sending big defenders up too. It doesn’t always work but it’s a good laugh and when it does (Montrose in the play-offs is a great example), it’s very exciting to watch.

Pretty much sums it up. 

One thing I would add, when defending he looks for everyone to get compact and behind the ball. A lot of fans around me used to get frustrated that we wouldn't press the ball. But we seemed quite happy to let them have possession as long as they were in front of us. Everyone had to work to close down any gaps. When we eventually did win back the ball we'd break with pace and numbers.