Gnome on the Bing

https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/playing-squad-update/ Looks even more drastic now that it's official. I take it the likes of Booth and Lawless have indicated they would rather search for a new club, hence the lack of a new contract.

I'm happy with the statement. It's clear, robust and indicates to me that the Board were asking the correct questions of Archie. I'm particularly intrigued by the statement: 'We have also agreed that we must return to playing football like Partick Thistle – we can’t be anyone else'. This is an odd inclusion in what is a very concisely written statement, with little padding and tangential material. Little allusions like this sometimes provide insight into the background discussions from which they originate but to which we don't have direct access. Has Archie -- be it consciously or otherwise -- been drawn into aping the style of another manager/team? Dunno. No firm conclusions can be drawn but, as I say, it is an intriguing aside.

I'm relieved that this discussion is to a large extent reasonable, constructive and evidence-based. For most of the season I was of the view that Archie should stay irrespective of whether we got relegated or not. However, the sheer extent of the deficiencies that have led us to this juncture – be they tactical or to do with the make-up of the squad, and which have been noted above by the likes of Legs Like A Spider and Lady-Isobel-Barnett (even though the latter arrives at the conclusion that Archie should stay) – has eroded the solidity of my stance. And never more was this the case than in the playoff games, which hauled our deficiencies into the starkest, blazing light. Our performance in these games was utterly dire and must have given even the most staunch supporter of Archie food for thought. So where am I? Well, as others have noted, a lot will rest on the extent to which Archie can demonstrate to the Board that 1) he has a comprehensive understanding of what exactly led to us being relegated; and 2) this awareness is backed up by a convincing narrative for how he would avoid repeating such errors going forward. Should Archie convince on these questions – and I take it for granted that the Board will be asking them – then I’m happy for Archie to continue in post. I believe that the margins are small at the top; that errors can easily be made with recruitment that are then difficult to rectify during the season; that Archie is a young and developing manager whose knowledge of, and commitment to, the club can’t be questioned; and that there are limited options available to us should there be a parting of ways. So I’ve wavered but ultimately I’ll be content with Archie staying. But it would be nice if we could ditch the automatic application of the ‘happy-clapper’ moniker each time someone expresses support for the manager. I’m sure everyone is giving serious consideration as to the best way forward.

Can barely write this due to the constant pop-ups. Admin?

I've heard positive things about Lamont and he looked like a player on the one occasion I seen him play.

Those we should prioritise: Erskine, Lawless, McCarthy, Cerny, Elliott, Doolan. Those we should definitely look to retain: Booth, Sneddon, Penrice, Spittall, Barton, Cargill. Those with question marks but who could do a job in the championship: Keown, Woods, Edwards. By my calculations, even if all of these players re-signed, which they won't, it would still see us lose 10 players from the first team squad.

I'd also take the Higgy of our 2013-14 campaign. He was sensational that season. He had fight and creativity.

Chic.

We were the better team for the majority of the match. Again. But thankfully we left with all three points this time. I thought Barton was excellent and a real threat having been given licence to get forward more often. Lawless also had a good match, as did McGinn. Storey, on the other hand, had a 'mare and was lucky to make it to half time. Doolan and Erskine should be relatively fresh for the double-header. We can do this. We will do this.

Haven't been this disappointed in a Thistle team in quite some time. The first half was decent apart from the small matter of putting the ball in the net, but I wasn't overly concerned as we were controlling possession and they looked bereft of ideas. In the second half, however, we were an utter shambles. laukat has nailed a couple of the points I intended to make. They changed shape during the break and as a consequence were destroying us down their right and outmanning us in the middle. It took far too long for us to respond -- so much so that we were one down when we finally did. Then the changes we did make only made things worse. Our game-plan, shape, pattern of play -- all of it -- seemed to go completely out of the window. Some of our decision-making was really poor as the ideas dried up and desperation set in. We repeatedly selected the wrong pass or lashed shots into defenders/out of play when there were better options available; and over and over we launched the ball towards Sammon only for it to come arcing straight back. It really was desperate stuff. In these postmortems I tend to identify positives in even the worst of performances. I suppose I should stick to that formula, but it's difficult tonight. Adam Barton didn't do much wrong -- he looked assured in possession and won a fair amount in the air -- and Erskine ran himself into the ground. But I can't get over that second half. Bloody hell.

Still feeling quite gutted, as I think they were there for the taking. I'm a fan of Archie but I think our starting formation hindered our attacking play . It was essentially a 4-3-1-2, which meant the midfield was extremely narrow. As a consequence Doolan and particularly Sammon were having to pull out wide and the latter struggled with his crossing. Fair enough, Doolan provided the cross for Erskine's goal, but I don't think this alone justifies a formation that saw us get bogged down in the middle of the park and had us hurling the occasional high ball towards the strikers. Our attacking play was much better against Hamilton, so I'm a bit disappointed that we didn't stick with that approach. As I say, I think they were there for the taking, so we should have played to our strengths rather than alter the formation for what I can only assume was the purpose of stifling their play. Anyway, positives: Erskine is in a good run of form, Cargill played well until he had to go off and Woods was decent. Negatives: well, I think the midfield was dysfunctional but I think that was down to the formation. Storey really struggled with his crossing when he came on. In hindsight I'm sure Archie will wish he'd put on Lawless instead. A tough one to take. We should have beaten that team.

Great move by the club. https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/the-john-lambie-stand/

Such terribly sad news. Lambie was manager when I first started going to Firhill. Like others I'd love it if the North Stand were renamed the John Lambie Stand in the gaffer's honour.

A good point, earned through a battling performance. Christie Elliot was absolutely phenomenal considering how long he's been out injured. He charged up and down that right flank all afternoon and put in some absolutely vital challenges. The back line as a whole looked more composed and restricted Aberdeen to a only handful of chances, one of which drew a brilliant save from Tomas. Woods and McCarthy both had good games, to the extent that even Osman's absence wasn't as keenly felt as I had initially feared. Woods was generally tidy in possession, even if he visibly wilted at around the hour mark, whereas McCarthy seemed to grow into the game and had a particularly good second half. I also thought Erskine was having a decent game but lost his way after the break. Indeed, only Lawless and Storey put in below par performances, and even then there was no doubting their work-rate. Storey was really quiet in the first half, whereas in the second, where he was seeing more of the ball and had several chances to run at their right-back, it was too obvious what going to do - namely, cut inside. Lawless just had one of those games where nothing was going his way. So, all-in, plenty of positives and a point that most of us would have taken before the game.

This decision isn't primarily about sentimentality or loyalty, as some have suggested. It's a straightforward calculation: is there another midfielder out there, who can be brought in on the money that would be saved by releasing Fraser, who is actually better than him. Archie clearly doesn't believe there is, and I'm sure he and the team are scanning the market constantly. We have invested a fair amount in Gary, yes, but that's because he's clearly a talented player. Few in the squad possess his range of passing. What's particularly pleasing about this decision, in my view, is that it indicates that Gary's most recent knock isn't serious, and that Archie and the medical team believe his fitness levels are such that he can make a significant contribution in the second half of the season. Fingers crossed.

That was brutal stuff - one for the 'purists'. We looked fairly solid in defence, aside from the odd lapse. Barton was a bit more subdued today when in possession, but defensively he was excellent. Lawless and McGinn put in shifts, although I was hoping to see more from the former in an attacking sense. Woods was tidy in possession and good positionally - hope the injury isn't a bad one. The only person I thought was struggling was Storey, who needs to raise his head occasionally and improve his distribution. He tends to put his head down and run, often into defenders or down dead-ends. He could easily have found himself hooked, had he not gone off with what looked like a hamstring injury. For me, however, one of the most significant positives to take from the match - aside from the vital three points - was Andy McCarthy's performance off the bench. That can't have been an easy game to enter at the point he did, but he slotted in perfectly and fired off several immaculately weighted through-balls and round-the-corner passes. I've felt for some time that Thistle have sorely needed someone who can thread passes like that, so fingers crossed for his continued development.

Yeah, I suppose. Just need to see a bit more of him and, particularly if Fraser leaves, it would still be worth bringing another midfielder in.

We'll definitely bring in some new faces; Archie has been clear about that. Our system requires attacking full-backs, so that remains a priority in my opinion, even though McGinn has done a decent job on the right. We either bring in a new left-back or put our faith in a recalled Penrice. We could also do with a metronomic midfielder, a la Sean Welsh, but they are a rare commodity. Nitrianski will be released, but I can see Fraser being given another sort-term contract.

That was an ugly, scrappy game, and we rode our luck on more than one occasion, but we're off the bottom of the table! I thought Barton was excellent in the middle of the back three, and Lawless deserves credit for the job he's doing in an unfamiliar position. Doolan also held the ball up well in the first half and won a fair number of headers against a defence not lacking in height. Yes, there were times where our midfield went AWOL, and as usual we dropped too deep too early, but in the absence of so many first team players, particularly in the full-back positions, a win's a win's a win. Have a great festive break, folks.

Another three points gained as a result of a battling performance. It wasn't pretty on the eye, which is understandable given injuries and the conditions, but I thought we looked more solid at the back compared with last weekend. McGinn was particularly good in the first half and I thought Edwards played well throughout. Lawless looked more assured positionally and Sammon and Storey caused them problems in very different ways. Credit must go to Archie and co for finding a way to dig out results amidst an injury crisis. Other management teams would have been paralysed by the decimation of our squad, and our full-backs in particular, but ours kept plugging away and found a way of putting points on the board. I obviously look forward to the return of those players who enable us to play a more familiar and attractive brand of football, but in the meantime this'll do fine.

And I know it.

Scenes. That was a game we should never have won but, hell, on occasions too numerous to recall these particular tables have been turned in a direction opposed to our interests. I much prefer it this way. I agree with much of what King Kenny has said above. Lawless, while not flawless at wing-back, did a job and gave it everything. We looked shaky at the back and I'm concerned that teams are actively seeking to capitalise on Keown's lack of height. On this occasion Moussa continually gravitated towards Niall, particularly in the first half. When we switched to a back three this seemed to be less of an issue. McCarthy was a bit lost at times, positionally, and looked heavy-legged, perhaps because he hasn't played much recently due to a development league ban. And McGinn had a game to forget. Getting back to the positives though, I thought Barton had a decent game, despite the protestations of fellow fans who seem to think he should run like a 100 metre sprinter. Also, Spittal and Doolan looked sharp when they came on. Storey needs to get his head up at times though. Finally, big Tam Cerny was obviously immense. A penalty save and what looked from the JHS like an incredible double save in the second half. If we can keep hoovering up points with scrappy performances such as this, while we await the return of players from injury, I'll take it. Mon the Jags.

Alternatively, we could provide more support for Barton in the middle by going 4-3-3, with the attacking personnel being quite interchangeable. -----------Erskine-------Storey--------Spittal------------- ----------Edwards------Barton--------McCarthy---------- McGinn--------Devine----------Keown---------Nitrianski ---------------------------Cerny---------------------------

I'd love to see us revert to a back three, but we just don't have the full-backs for it at the moment. I suspect Archie will go with something like this: --------------------------Storey ----------------------------- ----------Lawless ---------------------Spittal-------------- --------------------------Erskine---------------------------- ----------------Barton ----------Edwards------------------ McGinn--------Devine----------Keown---------Nitrianski --------------------------Cerny-----------------------------

I said that we had a rotten run of fixtures followed by an injury crisis. That we've played 9 out of 11 teams in the league doesn't contradict or invalidate this point. We did switch formation, to 442/4411 Sammon wasn't playing on the wing, he was pulling out wide when Cerny was hitting it upfield. I don't think Doolan was being played out of position. Throwing youngsters into a team that's out of form is fraught with risk. People who attend the development games regularly assure me there's no one quite ready to be thrown into the team under such circumstances. Who do you have in mind? McCarthy has done well in short cameos, and also when he played against Celtic, and I'm not utterly opposed to him being given a chance, but you have to trust Archie to know the kid's personality and current form.