The Queen of the South thread

[19QOS19]

Former QotS youngster Denzel Dumfries is playing in a football match right now.

He's just a shite Lewis Gibson.

[Manwithnoball]

A lot better today but hey it was our week to get a result. Good to see Connelly get a start but why instead of McGrory. Surprised by that. I seen East at EEP on crutches so that does not look good for us. Why don't we play Connelly up front with Paton. He has to do work he is not comfortable with in his position today. Just my thought but it's WG that makes those decisions. I would have taken Reilly off before Connelly today. The one that has been bothering me for a good few weeks is how little Todd is contributing to our game just now but plays full 90 every week. Young Gibson is a cracking player but is not a defender again this week put under pressure by someone taking him on. On the front foot he is a special player and love watching him while we have him. Thought Currie was good today good handling and coming for balls taking pressure off the defence. Think a draw was a fair result over the peice. Although as always we tried to throw it away at the end but thankfully got away with it. I think it would be better for all our young players to be loaned out they are not getting any football and understand that as WG needs results.

[TERREGLES1919]

On 01/12/2022 at 10:35, JmSG said:

Hello, I am looking for information about a former player, Gary Fraser, he played in the team in the late eighties and early nineties, could someone tell me what position/s he played?

I remember watching him quite a lot when I first started going to Queens gamed.

[Slipmat]

19 minutes ago, Manwithnoball said:

A lot better today but hey it was our week to get a result. Good to see Connelly get a start but why instead of McGrory. Surprised by that. I seen East at EEP on crutches so that does not look good for us. Why don't we play Connelly up front with Paton. He has to do work he is not comfortable with in his position today. Just my thought but it's WG that makes those decisions. I would have taken Reilly off before Connelly today. The one that has been bothering me for a good few weeks is how little Todd is contributing to our game just now but plays full 90 every week. Young Gibson is a cracking player but is not a defender again this week put under pressure by someone taking him on. On the front foot he is a special player and love watching him while we have him. Thought Currie was good today good handling and coming for balls taking pressure off the defence. Think a draw was a fair result over the peice. Although as always we tried to throw it away at the end but thankfully got away with it. I think it would be better for all our young players to be loaned out they are not getting any football and understand that as WG needs results.

Agree with all of that except for your comment about Todd who I thought played well today.

I think it's time that Reilly lost his guaranteed starting position though.  He works hard but for me doesn't link up with team-mates enough and I can't recall him scoring from outside the six-yard box.  I'm with you and would like to see Connelly and Paton up top, and I definitely think we could get a lot more out of Gibson Jnr if we played him wide midfield in a 4-4-2 and he didn't have as much defensive responsibility.  Wullie clearly wants to stick with a 3-5-2 come hell or high water though, and to be fair to him we are short of a left winger (as opposed to left wing back) unless he plays Todd wide and brings Cochrane or McGrory in to partner Wilson.

[Distant Doonhamer]

31 minutes ago, Manwithnoball said:

A lot better today but hey it was our week to get a result. Good to see Connelly get a start but why instead of McGrory. Surprised by that. I seen East at EEP on crutches so that does not look good for us. Why don't we play Connelly up front with Paton. He has to do work he is not comfortable with in his position today. Just my thought but it's WG that makes those decisions. I would have taken Reilly off before Connelly today. The one that has been bothering me for a good few weeks is how little Todd is contributing to our game just now but plays full 90 every week. Young Gibson is a cracking player but is not a defender again this week put under pressure by someone taking him on. On the front foot he is a special player and love watching him while we have him. Thought Currie was good today good handling and coming for balls taking pressure off the defence. Think a draw was a fair result over the peice. Although as always we tried to throw it away at the end but thankfully got away with it. I think it would be better for all our young players to be loaned out they are not getting any football and understand that as WG needs results.

I thought Todd was excellent today. 
All about opinions I guess. 

[lesterplunkett]

I also thought Todd was excellent today but he was at times given the freedom of EEP. Man of the match undoubtedly however was Ian shug Wilson. What a shift - head and shoulders above anyone on that park today and bossed the midfield. A truly magnificent performance 

[Manwithnoball]

11 minutes ago, Distant Doonhamer said:

I thought Todd was excellent today. 
All about opinions I guess. 

That's the thing it's all about opinions

[mwwqos321]

2 hours ago, Manwithnoball said:

A lot better today but hey it was our week to get a result. Good to see Connelly get a start but why instead of McGrory. Surprised by that. I seen East at EEP on crutches so that does not look good for us. Why don't we play Connelly up front with Paton. He has to do work he is not comfortable with in his position today. Just my thought but it's WG that makes those decisions. I would have taken Reilly off before Connelly today. The one that has been bothering me for a good few weeks is how little Todd is contributing to our game just now but plays full 90 every week. Young Gibson is a cracking player but is not a defender again this week put under pressure by someone taking him on. On the front foot he is a special player and love watching him while we have him. Thought Currie was good today good handling and coming for balls taking pressure off the defence. Think a draw was a fair result over the peice. Although as always we tried to throw it away at the end but thankfully got away with it. I think it would be better for all our young players to be loaned out they are not getting any football and understand that as WG needs results.

Ever thought of going into football management as your pre match talk would be dreadful.

[Rjc-1988]

I thought we played very well yesterday - our pass and movement was great at times and over the piece I thought we were the better side. I thought Currie, McKenna, Todd and Paton were effective and Wilson was MOM by a distance.

That being said - I look at the L1 table and I think the under achievement at this stage in the season is massive. People may say that we are only a few points off the play off places BUT FCE are 8 points ahead of us and Montrose 5 points above us. Both of these teams look rotten and worse than that we are only 3 points above the 8th team. What does this all mean? For me it means that it is high time that this squad started delivering some consistent winning performances - not one great week and then a collapse the week after.

 

Personally I refuse to give out plaudits until we are comfortably in a play off berth - anything less is abject failure I’m afraid.

[19QOS19]

I thought we played very well yesterday - our pass and movement was great at times and over the piece I thought we were the better side. I thought Currie, McKenna, Todd and Paton were effective and Wilson was MOM by a distance.
That being said - I look at the L1 table and I think the under achievement at this stage in the season is massive. People may say that we are only a few points off the play off places BUT FCE are 8 points ahead of us and Montrose 5 points above us. Both of these teams look rotten and worse than that we are only 3 points above the 8th team. What does this all mean? For me it means that it is high time that this squad started delivering some consistent winning performances - not one great week and then a collapse the week after.
 
Personally I refuse to give out plaudits until we are comfortably in a play off berth - anything less is abject failure I’m afraid.

Totally agree. Yesterday was a great result and a very good performance by all accounts. But much like after the Montrose game my optimism is still fairly non-existent given how many 'false dawns' there's been. If we can string 3 or 4 wins together that don't involve Clyde or Peterhead then I'll start to give this lot some proper credit.

[QoS99]

Will there be money made available to bring in one or two in January, or will it be the case of moving on fringe players?

[Slipmat]

11 hours ago, QoS99 said:

Will there be money made available to bring in one or two in January, or will it be the case of moving on fringe players?

I'm hoping we get a keeper in who will at least be challenging Currie for a starting position and not just warming the bench.  A left winger would be handy too, as would a right back, but I'd be surprised if we brought in more than one or two new faces.  Bange will be away, but I'd be surprised if any others leave unless McKechnie, Johnstone, Muir, Burns etc are farmed out on loan.

[Otis Blue]

12 hours ago, QoS99 said:

Will there be money made available to bring in one or two in January, or will it be the case of moving on fringe players?

We can only speculate (SD will know the real situation here but of course he will be constrained in what he could say on here by confidentiality issues) but would like to think that there would be some "extra" funds available from the visit to darkest Govan in the LC.  However, that may already be earmarked for replacement of the pitch next summer.  If some can be released then I suppose a keeper would be the obvious priority followed by centre back and right back.  We've proved we can be reasonable going forwards but our main problems lie at the back and leaking preventable goals.

[Slipmat]

43 minutes ago, Otis Blue said:

We can only speculate (SD will know the real situation here but of course he will be constrained in what he could say on here by confidentiality issues) 

SD may be the man with connections to the club and the relevant accountancy background, but surely Greenacres is our resident Martin Lewis and it is he who we rely on for trusted info about the budget of not only Queens, but every other club in the country?  

[SUPERSOUTH]

7 hours ago, Slipmat said:

I'm hoping we get a keeper in who will at least be challenging Currie for a starting position and not just warming the bench.  A left winger would be handy too, as would a right back, but I'd be surprised if we brought in more than one or two new faces.  Bange will be away, but I'd be surprised if any others leave unless McKechnie, Johnstone, Muir, Burns etc are farmed out on loan.

Muirs already away loan. 

[queenslad]

11 hours ago, Slipmat said:

 A left winger would be handy too, as would a right back, but I'd be surprised if we brought in more than one or two new faces.

Why would he sign a right back when we don't play with a traditional back 4?

[Slipmat]

29 minutes ago, queenslad said:

Why would he sign a right back when we don't play with a traditional back 4?

To give us the option of changing to a back 4 if the 3-5-2 isn't working.

[queenslad]

21 minutes ago, Slipmat said:

To give us the option of changing to a back 4 if the 3-5-2 isn't working.

Do you actually think that will happen?

[Slipmat]

15 minutes ago, queenslad said:

Do you actually think that will happen?

Personally I doubt it, although we did try it a handful of times earlier in the season.  If it were to happen it's unlikely Wullie is going to pick himself even though he's probably still our best right back option.  Playing McKenna at right back would give me the fear.

[TxRover]

So how has Dave McKay panned out for you lot? And how did Bene look for the Pars when you faced them last week? Just looking over some of our (limited) options and quietly weeping at could have beens.