Thistle v Motherwell

[Paulo]

Admin, can you lock this thread please?  Far too close to a reasoned discussion.

[Fearchar]

17 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

Fearchars argument is all over the place, though. 1st off he is criticising Archibald for being “reduced to placing his hopes on Erskine, Doolan and Lawless” Then he says Archie should have built his team around Doolan.

However, I wasn’t addressing that bit, but the last part of his post. 

He is criticising Archibald for not achieving those goals that Fearchar has defined. I think my question on which Thistle Manager has achieved that is relevant. Again, I didn’t ask him which club he should support, I asked which club has achieved his goals. 

But if the cap fits ?

When Doolan was in his prime, it seemed that any available tall, sturdily built centre-forward was drafted in so that Doolan could be kept on the bench. Now, when he is probably past his prime but the team's backs are to the wall, Doolan is brought on to save us (when he's not replaced by Storey ). Those indicate a consistent determination not to employ the available resources to maximum effect. Why?

Many other clubs in the league get a win against the terrible twins at some stage or other: our record in this spell in the top flight is remarkably poor by comparison. Our goal-scoring record shows similar under-achievement, as does our failure to reach a cup final. At best, Archie's record is one of stalwart defences, but in other respects it is difficult to detect first-team performances that fit the aspirations the club has shown by expanding the secondary teams and planning for permanent training facilities. I didn't even mention our record on signings that haven't come off, but it's another indication of decline: players don't see Firhill as a place to further their careers.

Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying: not that those are "goals", but signposts that the long-term strategy is not being reflected in the first team's performance. Presumably, strengthening and improving gradually in the top flight are the board's long-term aims, which would justify the tolerance of short-term relapses to achieve stability, but currently there is no indication of progress nor of lessons learned from past mistakes: the current first team is largely a mixture of temporary, average players and older players seeing out their careers. It looks stale, and is underperforming; substitutions like the double one in this game look like desperate last measures. If this team keeps the club in the top flight for another season, the expectations under current management could only be fending off relegation in succeeding seasons. Are you suggesting that Jags fans should be content with that?

[allyo]

38 minutes ago, Fearchar said:

Many other clubs in the league get a win against the terrible twins at some stage or other: our record in this spell in the top flight is remarkably poor by comparison. Our goal-scoring record shows similar under-achievement, as does our failure to reach a cup final. At best, Archie's record is one of stalwart defences, but in other respects it is difficult to detect first-team performances that fit the aspirations the club has shown by expanding the secondary teams and planning for permanent training facilities.

Apologies for selective quoting but the reason is my objection to this season's disappointments being used to detract from past successes.

Quick comparison of Thistle's average performance in the previous four years compared to all other bottom six teams.

P

W

D

L

F

A

Pts

Thistle

38

10.50

11.50

16.00

43.25

53.25

43.00

Others

38

10.19

9.24

18.57

42.67

60.95

39.67

It shows that we've more than held our own against those we'd (I'd argue) be expected to compete against, that we've won more games, lost fewer, scored more goals. Yes you could argue that we score relatively fewer goals when set against our points tally, and that a far better defensive record is predominantly what has given us the advantage, but I think that would be pretty ungenerous.

Point is, we haven't scored any less than everyone else. And if we were doing worse against the bigger teams, then we must have been doing a lot better against the smaller ones.

 

Edited May 10, 2018 by allyo

[Fawlty Towers]

Must be exam time as there is a lot of history being revised.

[allyo]

To be honest, none of it matters this week.

[Fawlty Towers]

6 minutes ago, allyo said:

To be honest, none of it matters this week.

Quite right!

[Lenziejag]

1 hour ago, Fearchar said:

When Doolan was in his prime, it seemed that any available tall, sturdily built centre-forward was drafted in so that Doolan could be kept on the bench. Now, when he is probably past his prime but the team's backs are to the wall, Doolan is brought on to save us (when he's not replaced by Storey ). Those indicate a consistent determination not to employ the available resources to maximum effect. Why?

Many other clubs in the league get a win against the terrible twins at some stage or other: our record in this spell in the top flight is remarkably poor by comparison. Our goal-scoring record shows similar under-achievement, as does our failure to reach a cup final. At best, Archie's record is one of stalwart defences, but in other respects it is difficult to detect first-team performances that fit the aspirations the club has shown by expanding the secondary teams and planning for permanent training facilities. I didn't even mention our record on signings that haven't come off, but it's another indication of decline: players don't see Firhill as a place to further their careers.

Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying: not that those are "goals", but signposts that the long-term strategy is not being reflected in the first team's performance. Presumably, strengthening and improving gradually in the top flight are the board's long-term aims, which would justify the tolerance of short-term relapses to achieve stability, but currently there is no indication of progress nor of lessons learned from past mistakes: the current first team is largely a mixture of temporary, average players and older players seeing out their careers. It looks stale, and is underperforming; substitutions like the double one in this game look like desperate last measures. If this team keeps the club in the top flight for another season, the expectations under current management could only be fending off relegation in succeeding seasons. Are you suggesting that Jags fans should be content with that?

I am still a bit confused. You have mentioned our inability to attract players to Firhill. Do you believe that is down to Archie or whoever at Firhill negotiates the deals - presumably Maxwell. If Archie isn’t meeting the board’s expectations, he would surely have been sacked by now.

You suggest that long term progress will inevitably have short term setbacks. Is this season perhaps that setback.

Regarding the subs on Tuesday, what would you have done that would have made a difference. If ever there was a time for desperate measures, Tuesday was it.

How can you be sure that if we keep the Management team that we won’t go on another 5 years of improvement ? Or that any other manager would do any different.

As Allyo has already pointed out every team of similar stature to us has been relegated or in the playoffs or is currently languishing in a lower league. 

[Auld Jag]

5 hours ago, allyo said:

To be honest, none of it matters this week.

Agree.Lets get 3 points at Dens and win the play off and then see what happens.

[javeajag]

3 hours ago, allyo said:

Apologies for selective quoting but the reason is my objection to this season's disappointments being used to detract from past successes.

Quick comparison of Thistle's average performance in the previous four years compared to all other bottom six teams.

P

W

D

L

F

A

Pts

Thistle

38

10.50

11.50

16.00

43.25

53.25

43.00

Others

38

10.19

9.24

18.57

42.67

60.95

39.67

It shows that we've more than held our own against those we'd (I'd argue) be expected to compete against, that we've won more games, lost fewer, scored more goals. Yes you could argue that we score relatively fewer goals when set against our points tally, and that a far better defensive record is predominantly what has given us the advantage, but I think that would be pretty ungenerous.

Point is, we haven't scored any less than everyone else. And if we were doing worse against the bigger teams, then we must have been doing a lot better against the smaller ones.

 

I think the more relevant point is that we are the lowest scorers this season 

[allyo]

Granted

[Yellow & Redneck]

Lowest scorers, joint highest number of goals conceded, and the team in the current top flight with the lowest number of points against Rangers, and our record against Celtic is around 1pt/50pts. 

Edited May 10, 2018 by Yellow & Redneck

[Auld Jag]

3 hours ago, Yellow & Redneck said:

Lowest scorers, joint highest number of goals conceded, and the team in the current top flight with the lowest number of points against Rangers, and our record against Celtic is around 1pt/50pts. 

Although it would be good to get points against our Glasgow noisy neighbours the damaging results for us this season are losing to Dundee at Firhill and Hamilton away after being ahead in both games,losing 4-0 at Ross County and only drawing with them at Firhill again after being ahead.Tuesday nights game was also a missed chance to put pressure on Hamilton.Now it comes down to Saturday and hopefully the play off games.

[allyo]

I don't understand the obsession with the old firm

[Big Col]

Its the fact that the players and management consistently sh*te it against them whilst other teams of a similar size and standard as us actually have a go and pick up points. You can include when we play Aberdeen as well.

[Yellow & Redneck]

23 minutes ago, Big Col said:

Its the fact that the players and management consistently sh*te it against them whilst other teams of a similar size and standard as us actually have a go and pick up points. You can include when we play Aberdeen as well.

You are quite right. I actually believe it is a problem of mentality and psychology. Just think about it: Alan Archibald to my knowledge never beaten any of the OF in any capacity, both as a player or a coach (someone might want to look into his time at Dundee United). Our Assistant Manager to my knowledge has never beaten the OF in any capacity. Neither has even our Goalkeeping Coach, Kenny Arthur. Both the players and management staff just don't know what it is to actually take points off Rangers and Celtic (I think I'm right in saying that we have taken 2pts combined in the past 5 seasons. And God only knows before that). Therefore we tend not to have a go, and just become terrified of them.  

[a f kincaid]

Those of a nervous disposition avert your eyes.   Picked the last 40 competitive games as a nice round figure.  League, Scottish Cup and League Cup.  Uncannily unimpressive.

RANGERS..... PL 40, W2, D6, L 32.     F28, A91.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

CELTIC...........PL 40, W2, D6, L32.      F22, A 84.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

[Auld Jag]

5 hours ago, a f kincaid said:

Those of a nervous disposition avert your eyes.   Picked the last 40 competitive games as a nice round figure.  League, Scottish Cup and League Cup.  Uncannily unimpressive.

RANGERS..... PL 40, W2, D6, L 32.     F28, A91.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

CELTIC...........PL 40, W2, D6, L32.      F22, A 84.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

We haven't played The Rangers 40 times.

[allyo]

13 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

We haven't played The Rangers 40 times.

[Jaggernaut]

3 hours ago, a f kincaid said:

Those of a nervous disposition avert your eyes.   Picked the last 40 competitive games as a nice round figure.  League, Scottish Cup and League Cup.  Uncannily unimpressive.

RANGERS..... PL 40, W2, D6, L 32.     F28, A91.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

CELTIC...........PL 40, W2, D6, L32.      F22, A 84.  Equivalent of 12 points from 120.

I'd bet those are by far the worst stats of any team that have played them 40 times in the same time period.

People sometimes ask what a team brings to the top league. For us, it's guaranteed wins for certain other teams 3 or 4 times a season. Nothing more.

[Lenziejag]

Is it not more important to have a better record against the teams round about us as opposed to Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen.

if for example we had drawn our game in April at County but lost to Rangers in the 1st Firhill game, we would have the same points tally but we would be 4 ahead of County and safe from automatic relegation(if I have done the arithmetic right).

[jaggy]

I think your correct. I’m sure last season we only lost 1 game out of 18 against bottom 6 teams, however we should do better against the top teams and at least win occasionally.

Edited May 11, 2018 by jaggy

[Lenziejag]

3 hours ago, jaggy said:

I think your correct. I’m sure last season we only lost 1 game out of 18 against bottom 6 teams, however we should do better against the top teams and at least win occasionally.

That would be ideal, but not at the expense of results against our direct competitors 

[spandau]

Why would it have to be at the expense of results against our direct competitors?  Why  can't it be in addition to them?

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, spandau said:

Why would it have to be at the expense of results against our direct competitors?  Why  can't it be in addition to them?

Well sure if we beat everybody there would be no problem. 

 

[Big Col]

Surely as a fellow Thistle fan you'd like to see us be competitive against the top teams? Rather than the tame powder puff stuff we've been served up in the last few years.